Skip Navigation LinksHome > May 2012 - Volume 19 - Issue 3 > Thyroid Fine Needle Aspirate: A Post-Bethesda Update
Advances in Anatomic Pathology:
doi: 10.1097/PAP.0b013e3182534610
Review Articles

Thyroid Fine Needle Aspirate: A Post-Bethesda Update

Bose, Shikha MD; Walts, Ann E. MD

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA

The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose.

Reprints: Shikha Bose, MD, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd. Suite 8709, Los Angeles, CA 90048 (e-mail: boses@cshs.org).

Figure 2 can be viewed online in color at http://www.anatomicpathology.com.

Collapse Box

Abstract

The Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology formulated in 2007 has standardized reporting of thyroid cytology specimens and streamlined management algorithms. Although 3 of the categories (benign, malignant, and nondiagnostic) are standardized and improved, the remaining 3 (follicular lesion of undetermined significance, follicular neoplasm, and suspicious for malignancy) remain fraught with interobserver variability and uncertainty regarding management algorithms. Recent and ongoing morphologic and molecular studies that aim to resolve these issues are summarized.

Thyroid carcinoma is the most common endocrine malignancy although it comprises only 1% of all cancer diagnoses. It occurs in all age groups, has a female to male ratio of 3 to 1, and is rapidly gaining importance in public health and research into novel therapeutics. In 2012, the National Cancer Institute estimates 56,460 new cases of thyroid cancer with 1780 disease-related deaths.1 The worldwide incidence of thyroid cancer has been increasing and has almost tripled in the last 30 years.2 This has been attributed to increased detection after the advent of high-resolution imaging, increased diagnosis consequent to widespread use of fine needle aspirate (FNA), and decreased stringency in histologic criteria for the diagnosis of papillary thyroid cancer (PTC).1 Given that relative survival from thyroid cancer substantially declines after age 65, and that the population older than 65 years of age is expected to double in the next 20 years, an increase in deaths from thyroid cancer can be expected unless significant improvements in the treatment of metastatic disease can be achieved.3,4 It is estimated that as many as 7% of adults have at least 1 palpable thyroid nodule and up to 50% of adults have thyroid nodule(s) detectable by ultrasonography.5 Currently FNA provides the most cost-effective method to diagnose thyroid carcinoma, select/stratify thyroid nodules for surgical management, and/or confirm the presence of metastatic thyroid cancer. Low morbidity, high levels of patient acceptance, inexpensive equipment, and rapid reporting of results have helped make FNA a key component in the evaluation of virtually all thyroid nodules.

The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (TBST) was developed to provide uniform terminology and diagnostic criteria for reporting thyroid FNAs and to relate these cytologic diagnoses to clinical management. It was formulated by a multidisciplinary group of thyroid experts who met in Bethesda, Maryland in October 2007.6 TBST describes 6 categories for the diagnosis and reporting of thyroid FNAs, each with an assigned “risk of malignancy” and associated recommendations for clinical management (Table 1).6,7 TBST terminology was subsequently incorporated into the 2009 revised guidelines of the American Thyroid Association (ATA) for management of (patients with) thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer.8 Several studies have now shown that implementation of TBST improves the quality of reporting by decreasing the number of ambiguous reports, increasing the positive predictive value (PPV) of malignancy in thyroid glands that are operated, and decreasing the rates of surgery for benign thyroid nodules.9–11 TBST does not appear to have affected the diagnostic accuracy or the false-positive rates of thyroid FNA or the frequency of intraoperative consultations.10 Three of the TBST categories (benign, nondiagnostic, and malignant) have been widely accepted, and their diagnostic criteria are straightforward and the recommendations for clinical management are clear. In contrast, issues/controversies regarding the 3 remaining categories [follicular lesion of undetermined significance (FLUS), follicular neoplasm (FN), and suspicious for malignancy] persist, underscoring the need for further refinement of TBST.

Table 1
Table 1
Image Tools
Back to Top | Article Outline

POSITIVE FOR MALIGNANCY

Since adopting TBST most centers have witnessed a substantial increase in the PPV of thyroid surgery for malignancy, malignancy rates now routinely exceed 90%.11 These high PPVs are to a large extent attributable to the fact that about 80% of thyroid malignancies are PTC and that most aspirates from PTC exhibit features that have been well described in the literature and provide a high sensitivity and a high specificity for the diagnosis of conventional PTC (Fig. 1A). Difficulties in recognizing the follicular variant of papillary carcinoma (FVPTC) in FNAs are reflected in the lower sensitivity and specificity of cytodiagnosis for this variant.12 Although the overall prognosis for PTC is good, approximately 10% to 15% of PTC exhibit aggressive behavior with frequent local recurrences and distant metastases. These tumors are often indistinguishable from well-differentiated PTC in aspirate smears. Few of the aggressive PTC have 1 or more morphologic attributes that while characteristic can nevertheless be difficult to diagnose in an FNA (eg, tall cells in the tall cell variant of PTC can be confused with Hurthle cell lesions or with the so-called columnar cell variant of PTC). The role of molecular markers in identifying the more aggressive PTC subsets is currently under intense investigation.

Figure 1
Figure 1
Image Tools

Follicular thyroid carcinomas (FTC) comprise 5% to 15% of thyroid cancers and, along with the other follicular-patterned lesions of the thyroid, require histologic examination to assess capsular integrity and lymph-vascular invasion for definitive diagnosis. These tumors present challenges for FNA and TBST and are discussed with the FLUS, FN, and suspicious for malignancy categories below.

Medullary carcinomas comprise about 4% of thyroid cancers, arise from the parafollicular C-cells, and are often associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia syndromes. Although the tumor cells can exhibit a variety of epithelioid, plasmacytoid, and/or spindle cell features and occasional nuclear pseudoinclusions, the presence of highly cellular smears exhibiting features that are not typical of PTC, appropriate clinical history, and confirmatory immunostain for calcitonin can provide an accurate diagnosis in most cases (Fig. 1B). In a recent study, FNA had a sensitivity of 83% and a PPV of 100% for the diagnosis of medullary carcinoma.13 The sensitivities and PPVs of FNA for the diagnosis of other uncommon thyroid malignancies including anaplastic carcinoma, lymphoma, and metastatic carcinoma ranged from 80% to 100% in that study.

Back to Top | Article Outline

BENIGN

TBST has had a major impact on the management of benign lesions of the thyroid as evidenced in the marked decrease in the percentage of benign glands excised.9,10 Accurate cytologic diagnosis of most lesions in the “benign” category is usually not problematic. However, the presence of focal Hurthle/Hurthle-like change in the absence of Hashimoto thyroiditis and the unequal and heterogeneous distribution of the Hurthle cell and/or lymphoid component(s) in Hashimoto thyroiditis can make it difficult to distinguish chronic thyroiditis and focal Hurthle-like change in nodular goiter (each categorized as benign by TBST) from Hurthle cell neoplasm (categorized as FN by TBST). Although it is understood that the risk of malignancy for a benign diagnosis by thyroid FNA is impacted by the percentage of benign nodules that are excised, this level of risk is estimated at <5%.6,7,14

Back to Top | Article Outline

NONDIAGNOSTIC

The inclusion within TBST of precise requirements for FNA adequacy (at least 6 well-preserved and well-stained follicular epithelial cell groups, each containing at least 10 cells) and the absence of a “negative for malignancy” category (that could encompass aspirates diagnosed as benign and those that are nondiagnostic) emphasize that “benign” and “nondiagnostic” are 2 distinct diagnoses in the Bethesda system, each with its own recommendations for follow-up. This clarification has decreased the frustration previously experienced by clinicians attempting to translate the variable and often convoluted phrasing that appeared in earlier reports into patient management. Excluding FNAs performed by inexperienced aspirators, the majority of nondiagnostic thyroid aspirates come from nodules that are either cystic, <5 mm, difficult to palpate, and/or located in the posterior aspect of the gland. Accordingly, ATA guidelines8 encourage the use of ultrasound guidance for aspirations of difficult to palpate nodules and nodules with >25% cystic component. The guidelines also emphasize the importance of sampling the solid component of these mixed (solid and cystic) lesions as a means to reduce the incidence of nondiagnostic and false-negative FNAs.

After a nondiagnostic FNA, repeat aspiration utilizing ultrasound guidance has been reported to yield a diagnostic FNA in as many as 75% of solid nodules and 50% of cystic nodules.15 In another study, a second benign FNA reduced the overall false-negative rate of thyroid FNAs from 10.2% to 4.5%.16 Noting that 90% of their cases with a false-negative FNA showed increased vascularity or suspicious features on ultrasound, these authors echo the ATA in recommending correlation with sonography as a means of prioritizing nodules that yield nondiagnostic FNAs for reaspiration. It is also well known that on-site assessment of aspirate adequacy substantially decreases the incidence of nondiagnostic FNAs.16–18 To date, the time-consuming nature of on-site adequacy assessment has prohibited its implementation in some cytology laboratories. However, it is expected that continued advances in telepathology will help make this service available to many more aspirators in the near future. About 7% of thyroid nodules (including some that are malignant on excision) remain nondiagnostic on repeat aspirations.19,20

Back to Top | Article Outline

FOLLICULAR LESION OF UNDETERMINED SIGNIFICANCE/FOLLICULAR NEOPLASM/SUSPICIOUS FOR MALIGNANCY

These 3 TBST categories, collectively referred to as “indeterminate diagnoses,” comprise from 5% to 42% of thyroid FNAs, and consist mainly of “follicular-patterned lesions.” Diagnosis is on the basis of the relative proportion of follicular cells with or without atypia, colloid, and a microfollicular pattern. Using the current Bethesda system, FNAs from a variety of follicular-patterned lesions (histologically confirmed as hyperplastic nodules, follicular adenomas, FTC, and/or FVPTC) can be diagnosed as FLUS, FN, or suspicious for malignancy. Inconsistent application of subjective and overlapping criteria for FLUS, FN, and suspicious for malignancy is reflected in low levels of intraobserver and interobserver diagnostic agreement within and across these categories and in differences in the risk of malignancy reported for each category by different laboratories.11,21–26 FLUS, with a TBST assigned 5% to 15% risk of malignancy, is the most frequent abnormal diagnosis rendered in thyroid FNAs. Although it is recommended that FLUS does not exceed 7% of a pathologist’s or a laboratory’s thyroid FNA diagnoses,6,27 this reported percentage varies from 3.0% to 29% across laboratories and from 2.5% to 28.6% across cytopathologists.11,21,24,28 FN, which has an assigned 15% to 30% risk of malignancy, is the second most frequent abnormal diagnosis rendered in thyroid cytology.

Histologic evaluation is traditionally considered as the gold standard against which FNA cytology is compared. The difficult task of refining TBST to reduce the number of indeterminate thyroid FNAs and to improve the cytohistologic correlation of follicular-patterned lesions is further complicated by the substantial variability in intraobserver and interobserver histologic evaluation of follicular-patterned lesions and controversy regarding the criteria that best define vascular invasion.29 In a study where 6 “experts” in surgical pathology of the thyroid reviewed sections from 15 follicular-patterned lesions, the intraobserver diagnostic agreement ranged from 17% to 100% and the unanimous interobserver agreement on benign and malignant diagnoses was as low as 27%.30

Review of the recent cytology literature indicates that several approaches are being explored to increase the clinical utility of TBST with respect to these indeterminate cytodiagnoses. These approaches involve 1 or more of the following: (a) reducing the number of diagnostic categories in TBST by combining or deleting categories in the current system; (b) determining whether cytologic/nuclear or architectural features are more predictive of malignancy and quantitating the amount or extent of a “diagnostic” feature that should be required for inclusion in the suspicious for malignancy category; (c) assessing the value of repeat aspirations in indeterminate nodules; (d) requiring consensus review before diagnosing a thyroid FNA in one of the indeterminate categories; (e) assessing the potential role of molecular studies as adjuncts to cytodiagnosis.

Back to Top | Article Outline
(A) Reduce the Number of Diagnostic Categories in The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology

In a retrospective study using TBST, we identified considerable overlap in the diagnosis and in the assigned malignancy risk estimates for the FLUS and FN categories and for the suspicious for malignancy and malignant categories and proposed a simplified version of the Bethesda System for reporting thyroid FNAs that provided 4 nonoverlapping, statistically significant, and more clinically relevant diagnostic categories: unsatisfactory/nondiagnostic, benign, FLUS/FN, and suspicious for malignancy/malignant.31 Using this 4-category simplified version of TBST intraobserver and interobserver diagnostic agreement improved.32 However, in a study of 40 cases originally reported as FLUS by 2 “experienced” pathologists and reclassified as benign, FN, suspicious for malignancy, or malignant, Shi et al,33 found that elimination of the FLUS category decreased the sensitivity of thyroid FNA for detecting PTC from 100% to 27%, increased the false-positive and false-negative rates for detecting cancer, and decreased intraobserver and interobserver diagnostic agreement. Tissue follow-up revealed 37% of the reclassified as benign cases to be PTC and 38% of the reclassified as FN and suspicious cases to be benign. The authors concluded that the FLUS category should not be eliminated although they advocated minimizing its use. In a multi-institutional study involving the elimination of the FLUS category and retrospective reclassification of FNAs originally reported as FLUS, no significant differences were observed in the negative predictive value for the benign category or in the PPV for the FN and malignant categories when the 5- and 6-category systems were compared.34 In that study the most significant differences between the 5-tiered and the 6-tiered systems were the percentage of cases classified as benign and as FNs. Singh and Wang35 suggest that the FLUS category could be eliminated without decreasing the PPV of the remaining TBST categories because aspirates with scant cellularity and/or preparation artifact are often misdiagnosed as FLUS rather than as nondiagnostic.

Back to Top | Article Outline
(B) Assess the Importance of Cytologic Versus Architectural Features as Predictors of Malignancy and Quantitate the Amount or Extent of a Diagnostic Feature That Should be Required for Inclusion in the Suspicious for Malignancy Category

Attempts to determine whether architectural atypia (microfollicular pattern) (Fig. 1C) or atypical nuclear/cytologic features (Fig. 1D) are more predictive of malignancy have not been conclusive. In a study that evaluated the predictive value of 24 cytomorphologic features for “neoplasia” (defined as adenoma or malignancy in excised lesions) in FNAs that were originally diagnosed as FLUS, several nuclear/cytologic features (irregular nuclear membranes, nuclear overlapping, coarse chromatin) and several architectural features (syncytial tissue fragments, isolated microfollicles, follicles with scalloped borders) were each positively correlated with “neoplasia,” whereas honeycombing, colloid, and histiocytes were inversely correlated with “neoplasia.”36 In another study of FLUS, cases subclassified into 5 groups using combinations of nuclear/cytologic and architectural atypia, Renshaw37 concluded that nuclear/cytologic and architectural features are both important risk factors for malignancy and that microfollicles, even in the absence of cytologic atypia, should be reported as FLUS. He suggests that aspirates with cytologic atypia alone, scant aspirates with so-called “atrophic” follicles, and cellular aspirates with a mix of macrofollicles and microfollicles without significant cytologic atypia have similar risks of malignancy. In contrast, Abele and Levine38 suggested that microfollicles and cytologic atypia (ie, nuclear enlargement) should both be required for a diagnosis of FLUS and that in the absence of significant cytologic atypia (ie, nuclear enlargement), FNAs with microfollicles should be diagnosed as benign. VanderLaan et al39 found that FNAs with cytologic atypia, both cytologic and architectural atypia (microfollicles), or “unspecified” atypia carried twice the risk of malignancy as compared with FNAs exhibiting architectural atypia alone. They noted that 90% of the cancers that followed a diagnosis of FLUS were PTC of which 85% were FVPTC. Architectural atypia alone was more likely to predict follicular adenoma than PTC. In a retrospective review of FNAs diagnosed as “suspicious for follicular neoplasm (FN),” Lubitz et al40 calculated the predicted probability of malignancy as 88.4% when the nodule was ≥4 cm and nuclear grooves and a transgressing vessel were both identified in the aspirate. If the authors excluded cases diagnosed as PTC on histology from the study, anisokaryosis and presence of nucleolus replaced the presence of nuclear grooves as significant predictors of malignancy, and then nodule size (≥4 cm), a transgressing vessel and anisokaryosis lacking a nucleolus had a predicted probability of malignancy of 96.5%.

Attempts to quantitate cytologic and architectural features that are qualitative and subjective are fraught with potential errors and have poor reproducibility. In a recent study designed to determine whether cytologic or architectural atypia could further stratify FLUS to predict carcinoma, we eliminated the confounding effects of subjective and semiquantitative terms such as “rare,” “few,” “some,” “focal,” “probable,” “possible” which were used differently across cytopathologists and scored each feature on a binary scale (present or absent) with possible and probable considered as present. In our review of 83 consecutive FNAs diagnosed as FLUS and subsequently excised, comparison of the FNAs from the benign and malignant cases showed significant differences (P<0.05) in the frequencies of nuclear grooves/irregular nuclear membranes, nuclear overlap/crowding, nuclear pseudoinclusions, and Hurthle change. The presence of nuclear overlap/crowding was strongly correlated with the presence of nuclear grooves/irregular membranes, and nuclear pseudoinclusions and malignancy was present in 61% of the cases whose FNAs exhibited one or more of these features indicating that these FNAs are more appropriately diagnosed as suspicious for malignancy (the category to which TBST assigns a risk of malignancy of 50% to 75%). No significant differences were observed in the frequencies of cell sheets, microfollicles, nuclear enlargement, colloid, lymphocytes, bland/compact chromatin, or cell aggregates/clusters reported in aspirates from the benign and malignant cases.41

Back to Top | Article Outline
(C) Assess the Role of Repeat Fine Needle Aspirate After an Indeterminate Diagnosis on Fine Needle Aspirate

Although there is general agreement that repeat FNA is helpful in the clinical management of FLUS cases, repeat FNA is generally not recommended for nodules diagnosed as FN or suspicious for malignancy as these nodules are best excised.22,37

Back to Top | Article Outline
(D) Consensus Review as a Prerequisite for a Diagnosis of Follicular Lesion of Undetermined Significance

By conducting a group consensus review of 50 thyroid aspirates originally reported as FLUS, Jing et al42 achieved a 78% reduction in the number of FNAs reported as FLUS, provided optimal interobserver diagnostic agreement, and substantially improved cytohistologic concordance. In the study, approximately 50% of the cases originally reported as FLUS were reclassified as benign. Although the ability of group consensus review to improve diagnostic accuracy is recognized, this activity is time consuming and not feasible for a large number of multislide cases on a routine basis.

Back to Top | Article Outline
(E) Molecular Studies as Adjuncts

Because differences in case selection, study design, and other confounding factors make it difficult to compare/reconcile results from morphology-based studies and/or to reach definitive conclusions on how best to improve the diagnosis and management of cases that yield indeterminate cytologic diagnoses, molecular technologies (genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) are actively being explored as potential diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic adjuncts to thyroid FNA.

Back to Top | Article Outline

GENETIC ALTERATIONS IN NONMEDULLARY THYROID CANCER

The initiation and progression of nonmedullary thyroid cancer involves the accumulation of various genetic and epigenetic alterations. Although hereditary forms of PTC are known, definite susceptibility genes have not been defined.43 In contrast, FTC is known to be associated with some familial syndromes (Table 2).44–48 Familial nonmedullary thyroid carcinomas are heterogeneous diseases, with early age onset, are usually bilateral and multicentric, and comprise about 10% to 15% of thyroid cancers.43 The sporadic forms of thyroid cancer are commonly initiated by mutations in effector genes (RET, BRAF, RAS) of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway49 while progression occurs by alterations in the phosphatidylinositol 3 (PI3)-kinase-AKT pathway (Fig. 2). Point mutations and chromosomal rearrangements are the most common mechanisms of genetic alteration. Point mutations, commonly seen in BRAF and RAS genes, involve the substitution of a single nucleotide within the DNA chain and result in an altered protein that is constitutively activated. These mutations have been found to be mutually exclusive.50

Table 2
Table 2
Image Tools
Figure 2
Figure 2
Image Tools

Chromosomal rearrangements, as observed with RET/PTC and PAX8/PPARγ, occur as a result of breakage and transference of a segment of 1 chromosome to a new site on the same chromosome or to a nonhomologous chromosome. This transfer either approximates the promoter of 1 gene to the coding sequence of the second gene (RET/PTC) leading to excessive production of the protein or approximates 2 coding sequences resulting in the formation of a fusion protein (PAX8/PPARγ). These proteins then function as oncogenes that drive the MAPK pathway.

Back to Top | Article Outline

BRAF MUTATIONS

BRAF is an intracellular effector of the MAPK pathway. In BRAF V600E, a thymine to adenine nucleotide substitution occurs at residue 1799 in >95% of mutations resulting in a valine to glutamate replacement at position 600.49,51 BRAF mutations are detected in 40% to 45% of PTCs with the highest incidence reported in the tall cell (80%) and classic (60%) variants. BRAF mutations are infrequent in FVPTC (10%) and in PTC that occur in young individuals and/or are associated with radiation (0% to 12%).52–54 Although BRAF mutation is reported to be specific for PTC, a low rate of false positivity has been reported in studies from Korea.55,56 BRAF mutations are also identified in 20% to 40% anaplastic carcinoma.57,58

Several studies have confirmed the association of BRAF mutation with aggressive tumor behavior.59–61 In a recent meta-analysis of 27 studies (total, 5655 patients), the incidence of BRAF mutation was 49% and BRAF mutation was associated with an increased likelihood of extrathyroidal extension [odds ratio (OR), 2.14; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.68-2.73], lymph node metastasis (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.21-1.97), and advanced tumor stage (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.61-2.49). Eight of the studies showed 2-fold increases in the risk of recurrent/persistent disease (95% CI, 1.67-2.74).60 BRAF mutation has also been associated with an increased incidence of tumor-related mortality.62 Studies are in progress to determine whether optimization of surgical treatment of BRAF-associated PTC will be beneficial.63

Back to Top | Article Outline

RET/PTC TRANSLOCATION

The RET/PTC translocation involves the translocation of the kinase domain of the RET gene located on chromosome 10q11.2 to the promoter of at least 15 different genes located on chromosome 10 or on various other chromosomes, resulting in aberrant ligand-independent activation of the MAPK pathway.50 The most common rearrangements are the RET/PTC1 (inv 10)(q11.2;q21.2) and RET/PTC3 (inv 10)(q11.2;q11), both of which are paracentric intrachromosomal inversions.64,65 The distribution of the RET/PTC rearrangement is heterogeneous. Clonal rearrangements occurring in >1% of tumor cells are exclusively identified in 10% to 20% of PTC.66 These mutations are commonly found in PTC of younger individuals or children and are associated with ionizing radiation.67 RET/PTC1 is seen in PTC exhibiting classic morphology whereas RET/PTC3 is commonly observed in the solid variant. Sensitive methods have also detected nonclonal rearrangements in <1% of neoplastic cells in 10% to 45% of benign lesions and adenomas.68–70

Back to Top | Article Outline

RAS MUTATIONS

Activating point mutations are located in NRAS, HRAS, and KRAS at codons 12, 13, and 61, with NRAS and HRAS codon 61 mutations being the most common.71,72 RAS mutations are found in follicular-patterned thyroid lesions including 40% to 50% of FTC, 20% to 40% of anaplastic carcinomas, and 10% to 20% of FVPTC.73,74 RAS mutations are also found in 20% to 40% of follicular adenomas and in up to 20% of adenomatous goiters raising the possibility that these lesions might represent precursor lesions.74,75

Back to Top | Article Outline

PAX8/PPARγ

PAX8/PPARγ translocation is identified in follicular-based lesions and involves an in-frame fusion of PAX8 (thyroid transcription factor) with PPARG1 (peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ 1) gene, t(2;3)(q13;p25) resulting in overexpression of a fusion protein.76 The mechanism of oncogenesis is not yet clear. This rearrangement is identified in 20% to 70% of FTC, 0% to 20% of follicular adenomas, and 0% to 5% of PTC.77–81 Tumors with this rearrangement are associated with a microfollicular, solid, or trabecular growth pattern, a thick fibrous capsule and overexpression of galectin-3 and/or HBME-1, markers commonly used in distinguishing benign from malignant thyroid tumors. This fusion mutation has not been reported in goiters or poorly differentiated/anaplastic carcinomas.

Back to Top | Article Outline

ADDITIONAL ALTERATIONS

Mutations involving TP53, CTNNB1 (β-catenin), and less frequently various genes in the PI3 kinase signaling pathway (PI3CA, PTEN, and AKT1) accumulate in poorly differentiated and anaplastic carcinomas as late events and are thought to be indicative of dedifferentiation and progression.82–86

Back to Top | Article Outline

MicroRNA SIGNATURES

MicroRNAs are small noncoding RNAs that function as negative regulators of protein expression. Many microRNAs have been found to be deregulated in thyroid cancer and several such as miR-146b, miR-221, and miR-222 are highly upregulated in PTC, whereas others are abnormally expressed in FTC (miR-197, miR-346, miR-155, and miR-224) and anaplastic carcinomas (miR-30d, miR-125b, miR-26a, and miR-30a-5p). Although the role of these microRNAs in tumorigenesis is currently unclear, studies are in progress to determine their utility in the diagnosis and prognosis of thyroid cancer.87–92

Back to Top | Article Outline

CLINICAL UTILITY OF MOLECULAR MARKERS

Thyroid FNA is an accurate test with good positive and negative predictive values for malignant and benign diagnoses. However, in cases where FNA results are indeterminate, the revised ATA management guidelines recommend that clinicians consider molecular testing to help guide clinical management.8

Because of its relative frequency and specificity for PTC, BRAF has been the most common gene tested in FNA samples. A meta-analysis of 22 such studies50 revealed that FNA material is reliable for molecular analysis and that the V600E mutation is highly specific for PTC. A total of 99.3% (1109/1117) of the BRAF-positive nodules were PTC on final histopathology. Five of the 8 false-positive cases (no cancer identified by histology) were reported in 1 study that used a more sensitive detection method. Thus, BRAF mutation positivity confers >99% risk of malignancy. In this study, 15% to 40% of the BRAF-mutated samples had an indeterminate FNA cytology result, indicating that the presence of BRAF mutation might be of diagnostic value in these cases.

As BRAF mutations occur in only 40% to 45% of PTC, testing for this mutation alone would miss a substantial number of PTC and other BRAF-mutation–negative thyroid cancers. Several studies have investigated the usefulness of a panel of mutations including BRAF and RAS mutations and RET/PTC and PAX8/PPARγ rearrangements for analysis of thyroid FNA samples.93–97 These studies demonstrate that in an appropriate clinical setting the presence of any mutation is a strong predictor of malignancy in thyroid nodules irrespective of the cytologic diagnosis.93–95 The presence of BRAF, RET/PTC, or PAX8/PPARγ correlates with the presence of malignancy in 100% of cases, whereas RAS mutations have a 74% to 87% PPV for cancer, consistent with the known presence of RAS mutations in some benign follicular adenomas and goiters. Despite the lower specificity for malignancy, RAS mutations have the attribute of being positive in more challenging cytologic diagnoses such as FVPTC and FTC.

A recent prospective analysis98 of residual material from 1056 consecutive thyroid FNA samples with indeterminate cytology (ie, Bethesda categories of FLUS, FN, and suspicious for malignancy) showed that the residual material was adequate for molecular analysis in 92% of cases. A total of 479 of the patients underwent surgery. The mutation analysis was performed using a newly developed polymerase chain reaction assay for a panel of mutations: BRAF V600E, NRAS codon 61, HRAS codon 61, and KRAS codons 12/13 point mutations and RET/PTC1, RET/PTC3, and PAX8/PPARγ rearrangements and included stringent assessment for the presence of epithelial cells. Detection of any mutation conferred 88%, 87%, and 95% risk of malignancy in the FLUS, FN, and suspicious for malignancy Bethesda categories, respectively. The risk of cancer in mutation-negative nodules was 6%, 14%, and 28% in the FLUS, FN, and suspicious for malignancy categories, respectively. There were 13 mutation-negative cancers in the FLUS FNAs. Of these, only 1 lesion showed extrathyroidal extension. It is noteworthy that even with the use of this panel of mutations, substantial numbers of thyroid cancers in the FN and suspicious for malignancy groups remained mutation negative. Although the clinical management of these patients was not significantly affected, Nikiforov et al98 proposed that these patients can be offered lobectomy instead of the 1-step total thyroidectomy, which is appropriate in mutation-positive cases.

Although molecular testing is reported to decrease the false-negative rate of benign cytologic diagnoses, there is currently little impetus to perform molecular analysis on these samples as the risk of malignancy is <5%. Various studies have reported reductions in false-negative rates in FNAs diagnosed as benign from 2.1% to 0.9%95 and 10% to 6%.94 The cost-effectiveness of testing all negative cytology samples and the potential benefit from the detection of only a few cancers requires further investigation.

Similarly, it is not established whether molecular testing of FNA specimens diagnosed as malignant should be undertaken. BRAF-mutated tumors may benefit from more extensive initial surgery as it has been shown that, because of the increased incidence of cervical recurrence, these tumors undergo more frequent reoperation than tumors without the mutation.63,99 Thus, Yip et al63 suggest that knowledge of BRAF mutational status might optimize the extent of surgery and lymph node dissection. In addition, on the basis of data that suggest BRAF-mutated PTC are more resistant to radioiodine treatment because of a reduced ability to trap radioiodine,100,101 an increased dose of radioiodine, less suppression of the thyroid stimulating hormone, and closer follow-up has been suggested as initial postoperative treatment of BRAF-mutation–positive cancers.102 Knowledge of the mutation status may also provide options for targeted therapy.103

The association between BRAF V600E and aggressive disease characteristics has also been reported in papillary microcarcinomas (tumors≤1 cm).104–107 Although BRAF mutation is identified in 24% to 63% of papillary microcarcinomas, <10% to 15% of these tumors behave aggressively. Howell et al108 reported that tumor recurrence is limited to older (65 years and above) patients. Using BRAF mutation status, a set of 3 pathologic features (superficial tumor location, intraglandular tumor spread/multifocality, and tumor fibrosis), and stepwise regression analysis, Niemeier et al109 developed a combined molecular pathologic score for predicting aggressive tumor behavior. Using this score, their sensitivity and specificity for detection of extrathyroidal spread or recurrence increased from 77% to 96% and from 68% to 80%, respectively; thus indicating that BRAF mutational status could stratify papillary microcarcinomas for aggressive clinical management.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CONCLUSIONS

The Bethesda classification has standardized reporting of thyroid cytology specimens and streamlined management algorithms. However, it has generated considerable controversy regarding the use and management of the indeterminate category. Many studies (both morphologic and molecular) are ongoing in an effort to improve the diagnosis and management of this group of cases. Whether molecular analysis alone or in concert with morphologic evaluation will provide reliable stratification of indeterminate thyroid FNAs is not yet clear. Cost-effectiveness, management algorithms, and specific indications will also need to be determined.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Thyroid. 2012; Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/thyro.html. Accessed November 10, 2011

2. Kilfoy BA, Zheng T, Holford TR, et al. International patterns and trends in thyroid cancer incidence, 1973–2002. Cancer Causes Control. 2009;20:525–531

3. Gilliland FD, Hunt WC, Morris DM, et al. Prognostic factors for thyroid carcinoma. A population-based study of 15,698 cases from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program 1973–1991. Cancer. 1997;79:564–573

4. Smith BD, Smith GL, Hurria A, et al. Future of cancer incidence in the United States: burdens upon an aging, changing nation. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2758–2765

5. Gharib H, Papini E, Valcavi R, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and Associazione Medici Endocrinologi medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules. Endocr Pract. 2006;12:63–102

6. Baloch ZW, Cibas ES, Clark DP, et al. The National Cancer Institute Thyroid fine needle aspiration state of the science conference: a summation. Cytojournal. 2008;5:6

7. Cibas ES, Ali SZ. The Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132:658–665

8. Cooper DS, Doherty GM, Haugen BR, et al. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2009;19:1167–1214

9. Ozluk Y, Pehlivan E, Gulluoglu MG, et al. The use of the Bethesda terminology in thyroid fine-needle aspiration results in a lower rate of surgery for nonmalignant nodules: a report from a reference center in Turkey. Int J Surg Pathol. 2011;19:761–771

10. Crowe A, Linder A, Hameed O, et al. The impact of implementation of the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology on the quality of reporting, ‘risk’ of malignancy, surgical rate, and rate of frozen sections requested for thyroid lesions. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011;119:315–321

11. Theoharis CG, Schofield KM, Hammers L, et al. The Bethesda thyroid fine-needle aspiration classification system: year 1 at an academic institution. Thyroid. 2009;19:1215–1223

12. Renshaw AA. Sensitivity of fine-needle aspiration for papillary carcinoma of the thyroid correlates with tumor size. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:471–474

13. Dustin SM, Jo VY, Hanley KZ, et al. High sensitivity and positive predictive value of fine-needle aspiration for uncommon thyroid malignancies. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

14. Renshaw A. An estimate of risk of malignancy for a benign diagnosis in thyroid fine-needle aspirates. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118:190–195

15. Alexander EK, Heering JP, Benson CB, et al. Assessment of nondiagnostic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspirations of thyroid nodules. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:4924–4927

16. Chernyavsky VS, Shanker BA, Davidov T, et al. Is one benign fine needle aspiration enough? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Published online

17. Redman R, Zalaznick H, Mazzaferri EL, et al. The impact of assessing specimen adequacy and number of needle passes for fine-needle aspiration biopsy of thyroid nodules. Thyroid. 2006;16:55–60

18. Baloch ZW, Tam D, Langer J, et al. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the thyroid: role of on-site assessment and multiple cytologic preparations. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:425–429

19. de los Santos ET, Keyhani-Rofagha S, Cunningham JJ, et al. Cystic thyroid nodules. The dilemma of malignant lesions. Arch Intern Med. 1990;150:1422–1427

20. Yeh MW, Demircan O, Ituarte P, et al. False-negative fine-needle aspiration cytology results delay treatment and adversely affect outcome in patients with thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid. 2004;14:207–215

21. Nayar R, Ivanovic M. The indeterminate thyroid fine-needle aspiration experience from an academic center using terminology similar to that proposed in the 2007 National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference. Cancer. 2009;117:195–202

22. Faquin WC, Baloch ZW. Fine-needle aspiration of follicular patterned lesions of the thyroid: diagnosis, management, and follow-up according to National Cancer Institute (NCI) recommendations. Diagn Cytopathol. 2010;38:731–739

23. Jo VY, Stelow EB, Dustin SM, et al. Malignancy risk for fine-needle aspiration of thyroid lesions according to the Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010;134:450–456

24. Layfield LJ, Morton MJ, Cramer HM, et al. Implications of the proposed thyroid fine-needle aspiration category of ‘follicular lesion of undetermined significance’: a five-year multi-institutional analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37:710–714

25. Renshaw AA. Should ‘atypical follicular cells’ in thyroid fine-needle aspirates be subclassified? Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118:186–189

26. Krane JF, Vanderlaan PA, Faquin WC, et al. The atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance: malignant ratio: a proposed performance measure for reporting in the Bethesda system for thyroid cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

27. Ali SZ The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology Definitions, Criteria and Explanatory Notes. 2010 New York Springer

28. Broome JT, Solorzano CC. The impact of atypia/follicular lesion of undetermined significance on the rate of malignancy in thyroid fine-needle aspiration: evaluation of the Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Surgery. 2011;150:1234–1241

29. Mete O, Asa SL. Pathological definition and clinical significance of vascular invasion in thyroid carcinomas of follicular epithelial derivation. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:1545–1552

30. Elsheikh TM, Asa SL, Chan JK, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variation among experts in the diagnosis of thyroid follicular lesions with borderline nuclear features of papillary carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130:736–744

31. Marchevsky AM, Walts AE, Bose S, et al. Evidence-based evaluation of the risks of malignancy predicted by thyroid fine-needle aspiration biopsies. Diagn Cytopathol. 2010;38:252–259

32. Walts AE, Bose S, Fan X, et al. A simplified Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology using only four categories improves intra- and inter-observer diagnostic agreement and provides non-overlapping estimates of malignancy risks. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

33. Shi Y, Ding X, Klein M, et al. Thyroid fine-needle aspiration with atypia of undetermined significance: a necessary or optional category? Cancer. 2009;117:298–304

34. Bongiovanni M, Crippa S, Baloch Z, et al. Comparison of 5-tiered and 6-tiered diagnostic systems for the reporting of thyroid cytopathology: a multi-institutional study. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

35. Singh RS, Wang HH. Eliminating the ‘atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance’ category from the bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136:896–902

36. Jing X, Roh MH, Knoepp SM, et al. Minimizing the diagnosis of ‘follicular lesion of undetermined significance’ and identifying predictive features for neoplasia. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011;39:737–742

37. Renshaw AA. Subclassification of atypical cells of undetermined significance in direct smears of fine-needle aspirations of the thyroid: distinct patterns and associated risk of malignancy. Cancer Cytopathol. 2011;119:322–327

38. Abele JS, Levine RA. Diagnostic criteria and risk-adapted approach to indeterminate thyroid cytodiagnosis. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118:415–422

39. VanderLaan PA, Marqusee E, Krane JF. Usefulness of diagnostic qualifiers for thyroid fine-needle aspirations with atypia of undetermined significance. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136:572–577

40. Lubitz CC, Faquin WC, Yang J, et al. Clinical and cytological features predictive of malignancy in thyroid follicular neoplasms. Thyroid. 2010;20:25–31

41. Walts AE, Bresee C, Bose S. Can cytomorphology further stratify thyroid fine needle aspirates diagnosed as follicular lesion of undetermined significance? Cytojournal. 2011;8:S66

42. Jing X, Knoepp SM, Roh MH, et al. Group consensus review minimizes the diagnosis of ‘follicular lesion of undetermined significance’ and improves cytohistologic concordance. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

43. Nose V. Familial thyroid cancer: a review. Mod Pathol. 2011;24(suppl 2):S19–S33

44. Marsh DJ, Coulon V, Lunetta KL, et al. Mutation spectrum and genotype-phenotype analyses in Cowden disease and Bannayan-Zonana syndrome, two hamartoma syndromes with germline PTEN mutation. Hum Mol Genet. 1998;7:507–515

45. Eng C. PTEN: one gene, many syndromes. Hum Mutat. 2003;22:183–198

46. Harach HR, Soubeyran I, Brown A, et al. Thyroid pathologic findings in patients with Cowden disease. Ann Diagn Pathol. 1999;3:331–340

47. Stratakis CA, Courcoutsakis NA, Abati A, et al. Thyroid gland abnormalities in patients with the syndrome of spotty skin pigmentation, myxomas, endocrine overactivity, and schwannomas (Carney complex). J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1997;82:2037–2043

48. Goto M, Miller RW, Ishikawa Y, et al. Excess of rare cancers in Werner syndrome (adult progeria). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1996;5:239–246

49. Kimura ET, Nikiforova MN, Zhu Z, et al. High prevalence of BRAF mutations in thyroid cancer: genetic evidence for constitutive activation of the RET/PTC-RAS-BRAF signaling pathway in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2003;63:1454–1457

50. Nikiforov YE, Nikiforova MN. Molecular genetics and diagnosis of thyroid cancer. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2011;7:569–580

51. Cohen Y, Xing M, Mambo E, et al. BRAF mutation in papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:625–627

52. Lima J, Trovisco V, Soares P, et al. BRAF mutations are not a major event in post-Chernobyl childhood thyroid carcinomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004;89:4267–4271

53. Lee JH, Lee ES, Kim YS. Clinicopathologic significance of BRAF V600E mutation in papillary carcinomas of the thyroid: a meta-analysis. Cancer. 2007;110:38–46

54. Xing M. BRAF mutation in thyroid cancer. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2005;12:245–262

55. Kim SW, Lee JI, Kim JW, et al. BRAFV600E mutation analysis in fine-needle aspiration cytology specimens for evaluation of thyroid nodule: a large series in a BRAFV600E-prevalent population. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95:3693–3700

56. Kim SK, Hwang TS, Yoo YB, et al. Surgical results of thyroid nodules according to a management guideline based on the BRAF(V600E) mutation status. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96:658–664

57. Nikiforova MN, Kimura ET, Gandhi M, et al. BRAF mutations in thyroid tumors are restricted to papillary carcinomas and anaplastic or poorly differentiated carcinomas arising from papillary carcinomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88:5399–5404

58. Begum S, Rosenbaum E, Henrique R, et al. BRAF mutations in anaplastic thyroid carcinoma: implications for tumor origin, diagnosis and treatment. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:1359–1363

59. Kim SY, Yoon J, Ko YS, et al. Constitutive phosphorylation of the FOXO1 transcription factor in gastric cancer cells correlates with microvessel area and the expressions of angiogenesis-related molecules. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:264

60. Kim TH, Park YJ, Lim JA, et al. The association of the BRAF(V600E) mutation with prognostic factors and poor clinical outcome in papillary thyroid cancer: a meta-analysis. Cancer. 2011 Epub

61. Xing M, Westra WH, Tufano RP, et al. BRAF mutation predicts a poorer clinical prognosis for papillary thyroid cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;90:6373–6379

62. Elisei R, Ugolini C, Viola D, et al. BRAF(V600E) mutation and outcome of patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma: a 15-year median follow-up study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93:3943–3949

63. Yip L, Nikiforova MN, Carty SE, et al. Optimizing surgical treatment of papillary thyroid carcinoma associated with BRAF mutation. Surgery. 2009;146:1215–1223

64. Grieco M, Santoro M, Berlingieri MT, et al. PTC is a novel rearranged form of the ret proto-oncogene and is frequently detected in vivo in human thyroid papillary carcinomas. Cell. 1990;60:557–563

65. Santoro M, Dathan NA, Berlingieri MT, et al. Molecular characterization of RET/PTC3; a novel rearranged version of the RETproto-oncogene in a human thyroid papillary carcinoma. Oncogene. 1994;9:509–516

66. Santoro M, Carlomagno F, Hay ID, et al. Ret oncogene activation in human thyroid neoplasms is restricted to the papillary cancer subtype. J Clin Invest. 1992;89:1517–1522

67. Elisei R, Romei C, Vorontsova T, et al. RET/PTC rearrangements in thyroid nodules: studies in irradiated and not irradiated, malignant and benign thyroid lesions in children and adults. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001;86:3211–3216

68. Zhu Z, Ciampi R, Nikiforova MN, et al. Prevalence of RET/PTC rearrangements in thyroid papillary carcinomas: effects of the detection methods and genetic heterogeneity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91:3603–3610

69. Ishizaka Y, Kobayashi S, Ushijima T, et al. Detection of retTPC/PTC transcripts in thyroid adenomas and adenomatous goiter by an RT-PCR method. Oncogene. 1991;6:1667–1672

70. Sheils OM, O’Eary JJ, Uhlmann V, et al. ret/PTC-1 activation in Hashimoto thyroiditis. Int J Surg Pathol. 2000;8:185–189

71. Suarez HG, du Villard JA, Severino M, et al. Presence of mutations in all three ras genes in human thyroid tumors. Oncogene. 1990;5:565–570

72. Esapa CT, Johnson SJ, Kendall-Taylor P, et al. Prevalence of Ras mutations in thyroid neoplasia. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1999;50:529–535

73. Zhu Z, Gandhi M, Nikiforova MN, et al. Molecular profile and clinical-pathologic features of the follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma. An unusually high prevalence of ras mutations. Am J Clin Pathol. 2003;120:71–77

74. Karga H, Lee JK, Vickery AL, et al. Ras oncogene mutations in benign and malignant thyroid neoplasms. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1991;73:832–836

75. Garcia-Rostan G, Zhao H, Camp RL, et al. Ras mutations are associated with aggressive tumor phenotypes and poor prognosis in thyroid cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3226–3235

76. Kroll TG, Sarraf P, Pecciarini L, et al. PAX8-PPARgamma1 fusion oncogene in human thyroid carcinoma [corrected]. Science. 2000;289:1357–1360

77. French CA, Alexander EK, Cibas ES, et al. Genetic and biological subgroups of low-stage follicular thyroid cancer. Am J Pathol. 2003;162:1053–1060

78. Nikiforova MN, Lynch RA, Biddinger PW, et al. RAS point mutations and PAX8-PPAR gamma rearrangement in thyroid tumors: evidence for distinct molecular pathways in thyroid follicular carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88:2318–2326

79. Marques AR, Espadinha C, Catarino AL, et al. Expression of PAX8-PPAR gamma 1 rearrangements in both follicular thyroid carcinomas and adenomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:3947–3952

80. Nikiforova MN, Biddinger PW, Caudill CM, et al. PAX8-PPAR gamma rearrangement in thyroid tumors: RT-PCR and immunohistochemical analyses. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:1016–1023

81. Castro P, Rebocho AP, Soares RJ, et al. PAX8-PPAR gamma rearrangement is frequently detected in the follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91:213–220

82. Ito T, Seyama T, Mizuno T, et al. Unique association of p53 mutations with undifferentiated but not with differentiated carcinomas of the thyroid gland. Cancer Res. 1992;52:1369–1371

83. Garcia-Rostan G, Camp RL, Herrero A, et al. Beta-catenin dysregulation in thyroid neoplasms: down-regulation, aberrant nuclear expression, and CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations are markers for aggressive tumor phenotypes and poor prognosis. Am J Pathol. 2001;158:987–996

84. Garcia-Rostan G, Costa AM, Pereira-Castro I, et al. Mutation of the PIK3CA gene in anaplastic thyroid cancer. Cancer Res. 2005;65:10199–10207

85. Hou P, Liu D, Shan Y, et al. Genetic alterations and their relationship in the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway in thyroid cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:1161–1170

86. Dahia PL, Marsh DJ, Zheng Z, et al. Somatic deletions and mutations in the Cowden disease gene, PTEN, in sporadic thyroid tumors. Cancer Res. 1997;57:4710–4713

87. Nikiforova MN, Tseng GC, Steward D, et al. MicroRNA expression profiling of thyroid tumors: biological significance and diagnostic utility. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93:1600–1608

88. Chen YT, Kitabayashi N, Zhou XK, et al. MicroRNA analysis as a potential diagnostic tool for papillary thyroid carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2008;21:1139–1146

89. He H, Jazdzewski K, Li W, et al. The role of microRNA genes in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:19075–19080

90. Nikiforova MN, Chiosea SI, Nikiforov YE. MicroRNA expression profiles in thyroid tumors. Endocr Pathol. 2009;20:85–91

91. Weber F, Teresi RE, Broelsch CE, et al. A limited set of human microRNA is deregulated in follicular thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91:3584–3591

92. Visone R, Pallante P, Vecchione A, et al. Specific microRNAs are downregulated in human thyroid anaplastic carcinomas. Oncogene. 2007;26:7590–7595

93. Ohori NP, Nikiforova MN, Schoedel KE, et al. Contribution of molecular testing to thyroid fine-needle aspiration cytology of ‘follicular lesion of undetermined significance/atypia of undetermined significance’. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010;118:17–23

94. Cantara S, Capezzone M, Marchisotta S, et al. Impact of proto-oncogene mutation detection in cytological specimens from thyroid nodules improves the diagnostic accuracy of cytology. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95:1365–1369

95. Nikiforov YE, Steward DL, Robinson-Smith TM, et al. Molecular testing for mutations in improving the fine-needle aspiration diagnosis of thyroid nodules. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:2092–2098

96. Nikiforov YE. Molecular analysis of thyroid tumors. Mod Pathol. 2011;24(suppl 2):S34–S43

97. Salvatore G, Giannini R, Faviana P, et al. Analysis of BRAF point mutation and RET/PTC rearrangement refines the fine-needle aspiration diagnosis of papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004;89:5175–5180

98. Nikiforov YE, Ohori NP, Hodak SP, et al. Impact of mutational testing on the diagnosis and management of patients with cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: a prospective analysis of 1056 FNA samples. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96:3390–3397

99. O’Neill CJ, Bullock M, Chou A, et al. BRAF(V600E) mutation is associated with an increased risk of nodal recurrence requiring reoperative surgery in patients with papillary thyroid cancer. Surgery. 2010;148:1139–1145 Discussion 1145–1146

100. Ricarte-Filho JC, Ryder M, Chitale DA, et al. Mutational profile of advanced primary and metastatic radioactive iodine-refractory thyroid cancers reveals distinct pathogenetic roles for BRAF, PIK3CA, and AKT1. Cancer Res. 2009;69:4885–4893

101. Durante C, Puxeddu E, Ferretti E, et al. BRAF mutations in papillary thyroid carcinomas inhibit genes involved in iodine metabolism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92:2840–2843

102. Xing M. Prognostic utility of BRAF mutation in papillary thyroid cancer. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2010;321:86–93

103. Sherman SI. Targeted therapy of thyroid cancer. Biochem Pharmacol. 2010;80:592–601

104. Lin KL, Wang OC, Zhang XH, et al. The BRAF mutation is predictive of aggressive clinicopathological characteristics in papillary thyroid microcarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3294–3300

105. Kwak JY, Kim EK, Chung WY, et al. Association of BRAFV600E mutation with poor clinical prognostic factors and US features in Korean patients with papillary thyroid microcarcinoma. Radiology. 2009;253:854–860

106. Lee X, Gao M, Ji Y, et al. Analysis of differential BRAF(V600E) mutational status in high aggressive papillary thyroid microcarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:240–245

107. Rodolico V, Cabibi D, Pizzolanti G, et al. BRAF V600E mutation and p27 kip1 expression in papillary carcinomas of the thyroid <or=1 cm and their paired lymph node metastases. Cancer. 2007;110:1218–1226

108. Howell GM, Carty SE, Armstrong MJ, et al. Both BRAF V600E mutation and older age (>/=65 years) are associated with recurrent papillary thyroid cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3566–3571

109. Niemeier LA, Kuffner Akatsu H, Song C, et al. A combined molecular-pathologic score improves risk stratification of thyroid papillary microcarcinoma. Cancer. 2011 [Epub ahead of print]

Cited By:

This article has been cited 1 time(s).

Cancer Letters
An antibody-like peptide that recognizes malignancy among thyroid nodules
Reis, CF; Carneiro, AP; Vieira, CU; Fujimura, PT; Morari, EC; da Silva, SJ; Goulart, LR; Ward, LS
Cancer Letters, 335(2): 306-313.
10.1016/j.canlet.2013.02.039
CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline
Keywords:

thyroid; fine needle aspirate; genetic abnormalities; BRAF ; KRAS ; Bethesda

© 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Login

Article Tools

Images

Share

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.