Schneider 2012.
Study characteristics | |||
Patient sampling |
Design: cohort study Inclusion criteria: participants diagnosed with thyroid nodules > 2 mm based on the spatial resolution of ultrasound equipment Exclusion criteria: participants referred with elevated or previously determined CT values, MTC or a family history of MTC, renal insufficiency, bacterial infection, alcohol abuse, proton‐pump inhibitor therapy, Graves'disease or autoimmune thyroid disease |
||
Patient characteristics and setting |
Number of participants: 11270 participants Number with NTD: 11,270 participants Number with NTD and calcitonin testing: 11,270 participants Sex (female%)(N): — Age (mean/SD): — range: — MTC: 12 participants Type of thyroid nodules: — Thyroid nodules detected by palpation or US: ultrasound Nodule size: only reported of MTC and PTC participants Number of nodules: — Sonographic morphology of thyroid nodules: only reported of participants with elevated basal CT levels FNA procedures performed through ultrasound guidance or palpation: — Setting: — Country: Germany |
||
Index tests |
Calcitonin as a triage or add‐on test: — Index test: basal and stimulated calcitonin Used calcitonin assay: solid‐phase, enzyme labelled, two‐site chemiluminescent assay with Immulite 2000 (Siemens Immulite 2000, Munich, Germany) Sensitivity: — Stimulated calcitonin: yes Indication: bCT > 13 and < 100 pg/mL (if PG was available and the participants physical condition allowed testing) Stimulative: pentagastrin (pentagastrin injection BP, Ireland, UK) Dose: 0.5 ug/kg bodyweight Time: 2 and 5 minutes after injection Reported and extracted cut‐off values Basal: reported 13 pg/mL; extracted: 13, 15, 20, 30, 50, 100 pg/mL Stimulated: reported 100 pg/mL; extracted: 100, 200 pg/mL |
||
Target condition and reference standard(s) |
Target condition: MTC Reference standards: histopathological examination after thyroid surgery, follow‐up Indication surgical treatment: 1) basal CT > 100 pg/mL, PG‐stimulated CT > 100 pg/mL, 3) suspicious thyroid nodules based on the participants history, sonography (hypoechogenicity, irregular margins, microcalcifications) or scintigraphy (cold nodules have been consistently associated with malignancy) Type: — Calcitonin negative (N = 11238) Number FNAC: — Number operated: — Calcitonin positive: (N = 32) Number FNAC: — Number operated: 18 participants |
||
Flow and timing |
Follow‐up calcitonin negative: — Type: — Duration: — Follow‐up calcitonin positive: participants with no sCT > 100 pg/mL, participants with no sCT performed Type: repeated bCT testing Number with follow‐up: 10 participants Duration: mean 7 months |
||
Comparative | |||
Publication details |
Language of publication: English Funding: no conflicts of interest Publication status: full article |
||
Stated aim of study | Quote from publication: "The positive predictive value (PPV) of a slightly elevated basal calcitonin for the diagnosis of medullary thyroid cancer is still under debate." | ||
Notes | |||
Methodological quality | |||
Item | Authors' judgement | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns |
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection | |||
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? | Yes | ||
Was a case‐control design avoided? | Yes | ||
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? | Yes | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests | |||
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | Yes | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard | |||
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? | Unclear | ||
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? | Unclear | ||
Unclear | Low | ||
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing | |||
Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? | Unclear | ||
Did all patients receive the same reference standard? | No | ||
Were all patients included in the analysis? | Yes | ||
Did all patients receive the reference standard? | No | ||
High |