Publication: BRAF mutation in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: After reclassification of a variant thyroid carcinoma
Issued Date
2019-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
11786930
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85063474027
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
OncoTargets and Therapy. Vol.12, (2019), 1465-1473
Suggested Citation
Warut Pongsapich, Cheerasook Chongkolwatana, Naravat Poungvarin, Kanchana Amornpichetkul, Nutthaya Piyawattayakorn, Pichpisith Vejvisithsakul, Prachya Maneeprasopchoke BRAF mutation in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: After reclassification of a variant thyroid carcinoma. OncoTargets and Therapy. Vol.12, (2019), 1465-1473. doi:10.2147/OTT.S190001 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/52131
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
BRAF mutation in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules: After reclassification of a variant thyroid carcinoma
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2019 Pongsapich et al. Purpose: Fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is regarded by the Bethesda system as the gold-standard investigation for stratifying the risk of malignancy of a thyroid nodule. However, some limitations affect the adequacy of the obtained materials, resulting in 30% of the cytological results remaining in the indeterminate category. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of the BRAF mutation in cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules after the reclassification of a variant thyroid carcinoma. Patients and methods: In this prospective diagnostic study, 76 patients with FNAB findings of atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) and suspicious for malignancy (SUS) were included. The BRAF V600 mutation from FNAB was confirmed by a PCR-based method (Sanger sequencing combined with allele-specific real-time PCR techniques) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Pathological specimens and features, including noninvasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP), were reviewed and compared to the FNAB results. Results: Using the PCR-based method, the BRAF mutation was positive in 13/76 cases (17.1%), with the diagnostic values of 16.7% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value (PPV), and 82.8% negative predictive value (NPV) in the AUS compared to 73.3% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% PPV, and 20% NPV in the SUS. For the IHC technique, only 20 of the 76 cytological specimens were qualified for testing. The BRAF mutation was positive in 13/20 cases, with the diagnostic values of 100% sensitivity, 63.6% specificity, 42.9% PPV, and 100% NPV in the AUS compared to 100% sensitivity and PPV in the SUS. The BRAF mutation was not found in the pathological reports for NIFTP. Conclusion: The malignancy rate is high in our data, with specific and acceptable accuracy rates for the BRAF mutation from FNAB found by using the PCR-based method. NIFTP has been introduced after the pathological reclassification. Molecular diagnosis might be useful to establish the nature of the disease.