↓ Skip to main content

The combination of four molecular markers improves thyroid cancer cytologic diagnosis and patient management

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The combination of four molecular markers improves thyroid cancer cytologic diagnosis and patient management
Published in
BMC Cancer, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1917-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Federica Panebianco, Chiara Mazzanti, Sara Tomei, Paolo Aretini, Sara Franceschi, Francesca Lessi, Giancarlo Di Coscio, Generoso Bevilacqua, Ivo Marchetti

Abstract

Papillary thyroid cancer is the most common endocrine malignancy. The most sensitive and specific diagnostic tool for thyroid nodule diagnosis is fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy with cytological evaluation. Nevertheless, FNA biopsy is not always decisive leading to "indeterminate" or "suspicious" diagnoses in 10 %-30 % of cases. BRAF V600E detection is currently used as molecular test to improve the diagnosis of thyroid nodules, yet it lacks sensitivity. The aim of the present study was to identify novel molecular markers/computational models to improve the discrimination between benign and malignant thyroid lesions. We collected 118 pre-operative thyroid FNA samples. All 118 FNA samples were characterized for the presence of the BRAF V600E mutation (exon15) by pyrosequencing and further assessed for mRNA expression of four genes (KIT, TC1, miR-222, miR-146b) by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Computational models (Bayesian Neural Network Classifier, discriminant analysis) were built, and their ability to discriminate benign and malignant tumors were tested. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed and principal component analysis was used for visualization purposes. In total, 36/70 malignant samples carried the V600E mutation, while all 48 benign samples were wild type for BRAF exon15. The Bayesian neural network (BNN) and discriminant analysis, including the mRNA expression of the four genes (KIT, TC1, miR-222, miR-146b) showed a very strong predictive value (94.12 % and 92.16 %, respectively) in discriminating malignant from benign patients. The discriminant analysis showed a correct classification of 100 % of the samples in the malignant group, and 95 % by BNN. KIT and miR-146b showed the highest diagnostic accuracy of the ROC curve, with area under the curve values of 0.973 for KIT and 0.931 for miR-146b. The four genes model proposed in this study proved to be highly discriminative of the malignant status compared with BRAF assessment alone. Its implementation in clinical practice can help in identifying malignant/benign nodules that would otherwise remain suspicious.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 13 27%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2022.
All research outputs
#6,273,824
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,564
of 8,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,614
of 386,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#47
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,278 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 386,138 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.