Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)


Print Feedback Export to File
9936165 
Journal Article 
No survival difference after successful (131)I ablation between patients with initially low-risk and high-risk differentiated thyroid cancer 
Verburg, FA; Stokkel, MP; Düren, C; Verkooijen, RB; Mäder, U; van Isselt, JW; Marlowe, RJ; Smit, JW; Reiners, C; Luster, M 
2010 
Yes 
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
ISSN: 1619-7070
EISSN: 1619-7089 
37 
2 
276-283 
English 
20091165 
PURPOSE: To compare disease-specific survival and recurrence-free survival (RFS) after successful (131)I ablation in patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) between those defined before ablation as low-risk and those defined as high-risk according to the European Thyroid Association 2006 consensus statement.

METHODS: Retrospective data from three university hospitals were pooled. Of 2009 consecutive patients receiving ablation, 509 were identified as successfully ablated based on both undetectable stimulated serum thyroglobulin in the absence of antithyroglobulin antibodies and a negative diagnostic whole-body scan in a follow-up examination conducted 8.1+/-4.6 months after ablation. Of these 509 patients, 169 were defined as high-risk.

RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 81+/-64 months (range 4-306 months), only three patients had died of DTC, rendering assessment of disease-specific survival differences impossible. Of the 509 patients, 12 (2.4%) developed a recurrence a mean 35 months (range 12-59 months) after ablation. RFS for the duration of follow-up was 96.6% according to the Kaplan-Meier method. RFS did not differ between high-risk and low-risk patients (p=0.68). RFS differed slightly but significantly between those with papillary and those with follicular thyroid carcinoma (p=0.03) and between those aged 45 years at diagnosis (p=0.018).

CONCLUSION: After (near) total thyroidectomy and successful (131)I ablation, RFS does not differ between patients classified as high-risk and those classified as low-risk based on TNM stage at diagnosis. Consequently, the follow-up protocol should be determined on the basis of the result of initial treatment rather than on the initial tumour classification.