The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Observer Variation in the Diagnosis of Follicular Variant of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
Abstract
The histopathologic diagnosis of follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma (FVPCA) can be difficult. Recent reports have suggested that this neoplasm may be frequently overdiagnosed by pathologists. We examined the observer variation in the diagnosis of FVPCA in 87 tumors by 10 experienced thyroid pathologists. The criteria that the reviewers considered most helpful for making a diagnosis of FVPCA were also assessed. A concordant diagnosis of FVPCA was made by all 10 reviewers with a cumulative frequency of 39%. In this series, 24.1% of the patients had metastatic disease (n = 21). In the cases with metastatic disease, a diagnosis of FVPCA was made by all 10 reviewers with a cumulative frequency of 66.7%, and 7 of the reviewers made a diagnosis of FVPCA with a cumulative frequency of 100%. The most important criteria used to diagnose FVPCA included the presence of cytoplasmic invaginations into the nucleus (pseudo-inclusions), abundant nuclear grooves, and ground glass nuclei. These results suggest that although the diagnosis of FVPCA is variable even among experienced thyroid pathologists, most reviewers agreed on this diagnosis for patients with metastatic disease. The use of well-defined histopathologic features should improve the consistency in diagnosing FVPCA. Since most cases with metastatic disease had obvious invasion, caution should be used in making a diagnosis of FVPCA in the absence of the major histopathologic features or clear-cut invasive growth.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Learning From Noisy Labels With Deep Neural Networks: A Survey
Song, H., Kim, M., Park, D., Shin, Y., & Lee, J.-G. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2022.3152527 · Cited by 1,308
BRAF mutation in thyroid cancer
Xing, M. (2005) · Endocrine Related Cancer · doi:10.1677/erc.1.0978 · Cited by 1,300
Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Thyroid Neoplasms
Baloch, Z. W., Asa, S. L., Barletta, J. A., Ghossein, R. A., Juhlin, C. C., Jung, C. K., LiVolsi, V. A., Papotti, M. G., Sobrinho-Simões, M., Tallini, G., et al. (2022) · Endocrine Pathology · doi:10.1007/s12022-022-09707-3 · Cited by 1,158
Self-citationPathogenetic mechanisms in thyroid follicular-cell neoplasia
Kondo, T., Ezzat, S., & Asa, S. L. (2006) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1836 · Cited by 893
Self-citationRivera, M., Ricarte-Filho, J., Knauf, J., Shaha, A., Tuttle, M., Fagin, J. A., & Ghossein, R. A. (2010) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/modpathol.2010.112 · Cited by 386
Metadata
- Authors
- Lloyd, R. V., Erickson, L. A., Casey, M. B., Lam, K. Y., Lohse, C. M., Asa, S. L., Chan, J. K. C., DeLellis, R. A., Harach, H. R., Kakudo, K., LiVolsi, V. A., Rosai, J., Sebo, T. J., Sobrinho-Simoes, M., Wenig, B. M., & Lae, M. E.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1336-1340
- ISSN
- 0147-5185 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2090842981
- Cited by
- 498
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Observer Variation in the Diagnosis of Follicular Variant of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.pas.0000135519.34847.f6
- The paper
- Lloyd, R. V., Erickson, L. A., Casey, M. B., Lam, K. Y., Lohse, C. M., Asa, S. L., Chan, J. K. C., DeLellis, R. A., Harach, H. R., Kakudo, K., LiVolsi, V. A., Rosai, J., Sebo, T. J., Sobrinho-Simoes, M., Wenig, B. M., & Lae, M. E. (2004). Observer Variation in the Diagnosis of Follicular Variant of Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pas.0000135519.34847.f6
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.