U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Cover of Screening for Thyroid Cancer

Screening for Thyroid Cancer

A Systematic Evidence Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Evidence Syntheses, No. 151

Investigators: , MD, MCR, , MPH, , MD, MPH, and , MPH.

Author Information and Affiliations
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); .
Report No.: 15-05221-EF-1

Structured Abstract

Objective:

We conducted this systematic review to support the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in updating its recommendation on screening for thyroid cancer. Our review addresses the following Key Questions (KQs): 1) Compared with not screening, does screening adults for thyroid cancer lead to a reduced risk of thyroid-specific mortality or morbidity, reduced all-cause mortality, and/or improved quality of life? 2) What are the test performance characteristics of screening tests for detecting malignant thyroid nodules in adults? 3) What are the harms of screening for thyroid cancer in adults? 4) Does treatment of screen-detected thyroid cancer reduce thyroid-specific mortality or morbidity, reduce all-cause mortality, and/or improve quality of life? 5) What are the harms of treating screen-detected thyroid cancer?

Data sources:

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to locate relevant studies for all KQs. We searched for articles published from January 1966 to January 2016.

Study selection:

We reviewed 10,424 abstracts and 707 articles against specified inclusion criteria. Eligible studies included those written in English and conducted in asymptomatic adult populations at general risk or with a prior personal history of radiation exposure.

Data analysis:

We conducted dual independent critical appraisal of all included studies and extracted study details and outcomes from fair- or good-quality studies. We synthesized results by KQ and type of screening test (i.e., palpation or ultrasound). We used primarily qualitative synthesis. We used random-effects meta-analyses to pool surgical harms. We also summarized the overall strength of evidence for each KQ.

Results:

We found no studies that met our inclusion criteria for KQ 1. Ten fair-quality studies were included for KQ 2. In two studies, neck palpation was not sensitive to detect thyroid nodules. Two methodologically limited studies that used selected sonographic features demonstrated that screening with ultrasound can be specific for detecting thyroid malignancy; one of these studies suggested that using a combination of high-risk sonographic features, such as microcalcification or irregular shape, can optimize both sensitivity and specificity. Three fair-quality studies met our inclusion criteria for KQ 3, none of which suggested any serious harms from screening or ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. However, we found no screening studies that directly examined the risk of overdiagnosis. Two studies met our inclusion criteria for KQ 4, but neither was designed to determine if earlier or immediate treatment versus delayed or no surgical treatment improves the outcomes of patients with well-differentiated thyroid cancer. Fifty-two studies were included for KQ 5. Based on 36 studies, permanent surgical harms, hypoparathyroidism, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy are not uncommon. Best estimates of permanent hypoparathyroidism are from 2 to 6 events per 100 thyroidectomies and are more variable with lymph node dissection. The rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy is estimated at 1 or 2 events per 100 surgeries. Based on 16 studies, treatment of differentiated thyroid cancer with radioactive iodine (RAI) treatment is associated with a small increase in second primary malignancies; RAI treatment is also associated with increased permanent adverse effects on the salivary gland, such as dry mouth.

Limitations:

The vast majority of studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound to detect thyroid tumors are not in screening populations. High statistical heterogeneity for surgical harms of hypoparathyroidism could not be explained by known clinical heterogeneity across studies. Differences in study designs and variable reporting on radiation doses limits our understanding of the magnitude and precision around the excess risk for second primary malignancies due to RAI.

Conclusions:

Although ultrasound of the neck using high-risk sonographic characteristics plus followup cytology from fine-needle aspiration can reasonably identify thyroid cancer, it is unclear if population-based or targeted screening can decrease mortality or improve important patient health outcomes. More importantly, screening results in the identification indolent thyroid cancer, and treatment of these cases of overdiagnosed cancer can pose real patient harms.

Contents

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services1, Contract No. HHSA-290-2012-00015-I-EPC4, Task Order No. 4. Prepared by: Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center2

Suggested citation:

Lin JS, Aiello Bowles EJ, Williams SB, Morrison CC. Screening for Thyroid Cancer: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 151. AHRQ Publication No. 15-05221-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2017.

This report is based on research conducted by the Kaiser Permanente Research Affiliates Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. HHSA-290-2012-00015-I-EPC4, Task Order No. 4). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents, and do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information (i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients).

This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.

None of the investigators has any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

1

5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www​.ahrq.gov

2

Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR

Bookshelf ID: NBK447370PMID: 28806040

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (2.4M)

Related information

Similar articles in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...