4.6 Article

Clinical-Pathological and Molecular Evaluation of 451 NIFTP Patients from a Single Referral Center

Journal

CANCERS
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14020420

Keywords

thyroid tumours; NIFTP; molecular pathology; FNA; cytology

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Pisa

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively analyzed a large cohort of NIFTPs and compared the clinico-pathological features of solitary and multifocal lesions. The results showed that NIFTPs often coexisted with other thyroid tumors, but no significant clinical-pathological differences were observed between them. Therefore, careful monitoring of the contralateral lobe is still important.
Background: Non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasms with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTPs) were introduced in thyroid pathology in 2016. NIFTPs are a group of follicular neoplasm with an indolent behaviour. In this study, we gathered a large retrospective cohort of NIFTPs and compared those presenting as solitary lesions and NIFTPs found in multifocal setting. Methods: A retrospective search of NIFTPs was performed, and the clinico-pathological features were recorded. For a subgroup of patients, pre-surgical ultrasound (US) evaluation, cytological diagnosis, and molecular analysis were available. Results: We collected 451 NIFTPs; 254 (56.3%) were truly solitary tumours, while 197 coexisted with one or more NIFTP/cancer. Contrasting unifocal and multifocal settings, NIFTPs size was the only significantly different parameter. Preoperatively, NIFTP nodules mostly showed low-risk US characteristics, indeterminate cytology and a RAS-like molecular profile. Conclusion: NIFTPs often coexist with collateral thyroid tumours. However, no clinical-pathological differences can be observed between solitary and multifocal NIFTPs. Despite the well-established clinical indolence of NIFTP, a careful monitoring of the contralateral lobe should not be excluded.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available