Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 325

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The indeterminate thyroid fine‐needle aspiration: Experience from an academic center using terminology similar to that proposed in the 2007 National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference

Open access
Nayar, Ritu, Ivanovic, Marina·2009·Cancer Cytopathology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To date, thyroid fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) has been used by clinicians as the screening test of choice to determine whether surgery is required and this is what the pathology report should communicate. Standard terminology for reporting thyroid FNA has not been implemented yet, and pathologists have used various reporting systems to communicate results. A significant source of confusion among both pathologists and clinicians has been the use of the indeterminate category. On the basis of an analysis of 1150 thyroid FNAs in 2000, this institution modified the reporting of thyroid biopsy results into 6 categories, including unsatisfactory. The indeterminate category was separated into 3 subroups: 1) indeterminate for neoplasia (IND), 2) follicular neoplasm (FN), and 3) suspicious for malignancy (SUSP). Repeat FNA in 6 months to 12 months was recommended for IND and surgery for FN and SUSP categories. METHODS: To determine the validity of this approach, the outcomes of this reporting system from July of 2000 to December of 2006 were analyzed. The IND category was used for 2 subsets of cases: (a) those that morphologically fall into the gray zone between adenomatoid nodule (AN) and FN, for Hurthle cell nodule (hyperplasia vs neoplasm), and chronic lymphocytic thyroiditis with concern for neoplasia; and (b) for suboptimal specimens due to low epithelial cellularity or collection artifacts. RESULTS: Among 5194 thyroid nodules, the IND category comprised 18%. FNA follow‐up was done in 21% of IND cases: 58% were benign/negative and did not require surgery based on cytology alone. Surgical follow‐up in 46% of IND showed 52% were benign/negative, and 42% were follicular/Hurthle cell adenomas. The surgical yield of malignancy in IND was low (6%) when compared with the FN category, which was 14% (more than 2× that of the IND category), and the SUSP category, which was 53% (almost 9× that of the IND category). CONCLUSIONS: A 6‐tier reporting system for thyroid FNA was effective for determining which patients needed surgery versus follow‐up FNA and also guided the clinician on the extent of surgery. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncy.20029

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 325

Metadata

Authors
Nayar, R., & Ivanovic, M.
Venue
Cancer Cytopathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-04-20
Volume
117
Issue
3
Pages
195-202
ISSN
  • 1934-662X (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-6638
OpenAlex
W2078715280
Cited by
325
References
1
FWCI
17.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The indeterminate thyroid fine‐needle aspiration: Experience from an academic center using terminology similar to that proposed in the 2007 National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncy.20029
The paper
Nayar, R., & Ivanovic, M. (2009). The indeterminate thyroid fine‐needle aspiration: Experience from an academic center using terminology similar to that proposed in the 2007 National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference. Cancer Cytopathology. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncy.20029

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.