Clinical and Sonographic Differences Between RET Fusion-positive and BRAFV600E in Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
Authors' conclusion
Patients diagnosed with PTC harboring RET fusion presented with distinctive clinical characteristics and sonographic patterns, underscoring the unique diagnostic value of ultrasound examination. It can provide a preoperative noninvasive primary screening method for RET-fusion diagnosis, thus facilitating targeted patients with purposeful molecular sequencing to improve treatment outcomes.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) confirmed positive for RET fusion or BRAFV600E by pathology, diagnosed August 2021–January 2024, all with US examination
- Participants
- 209 patients
- Exposure
- RET fusion-positive vs BRAFV600E PTC
- RET fusionn = 30
- BRAFV600En = 179reference
- Outcome
- Clinical and US characteristics
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- RET fusion: heterogeneous echogenicity
- 43.3%
- RET fusion: ill-defined tumor margin
- 90.0%
- RET fusion: irregular shape
- 83.3%
- RET fusion: intranodular microcalcification
- 83.3%
- RET fusion: scattered microcalcification around tumor/within thyroid gland
- 40.0%
- BRAFV600E: hypoechogenicity
- 95.5%
- BRAFV600E: round/oval shape
- 80.4%
- BRAFV600E: intranodular noncalcification
- 54.2%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Scattered microcalcification around tumor/within normal gland as independent risk factor for lateral lymph node metastasis (LLNM) in RET-fusion PTCs
| OR (95% CI) | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Scattered microcalcificationMultivariate logistic regression | 9.79 (1.31–72.93) | P = 0.026 | |
| 0.050.21520Odds ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Clinical and Sonographic Differences Between RET Fusion-positive and BRAFV600E in Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. Published 18 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →