Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 315

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

Impact of Proto-Oncogene Mutation Detection in Cytological Specimens from Thyroid Nodules Improves the Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology

Cantara, Silvia, Capezzone, Marco, Marchisotta, Stefania, Capuano, Serena, Busonero, Giulia, Toti, Paolo, Di Santo, Andrea, Caruso, Giuseppe, Carli, Anton Ferdinando, Brilli, Lucia, Montanaro, Annalisa, Pacini, Furio·2010·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism

Abstract

CONTEXT: Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is the gold standard for the differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules but has the limitation of inadequate sampling or indeterminate lesions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to verify whether search of thyroid cancer-associated protooncogene mutations in cytological samples may improve the diagnostic accuracy of FNAC. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred seventy-four consecutive patients undergoing thyroid surgery were submitted to FNAC (on 235 thyroid nodules) that was used for cytology and molecular analysis of BRAF, RAS, RET, TRK, and PPRgamma mutations. At surgery these nodules were sampled to perform the same molecular testing. RESULTS: Mutations were found in 67 of 235 (28.5%) cytological samples. Of the 67 mutated samples, 23 (34.3%) were mutated by RAS, 33 (49.3%) by BRAF, and 11 (16.4%) by RET/PTC. In 88.2% of the cases, the mutation was confirmed in tissue sample. The presence of mutations at cytology was associated with cancer 91.1% of the times and follicular adenoma 8.9% of the time. BRAF or RET/PTC mutations were always associated with cancer, whereas RAS mutations were mainly associated with cancer (74%) but also follicular adenoma (26%). The diagnostic performance of molecular analysis was superior to that of traditional cytology, with better sensitivity and specificity, and the combination of the two techniques further contributed to improve the total accuracy (93.2%), compared with molecular analysis (90.2%) or traditional cytology (83.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that molecular analysis of cytological specimens is feasible and that its results in combination with cytology improves the diagnostic performance of traditional cytology.

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 · 10.1210/jc.2009-2103

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 315

Metadata

Authors
Cantara, S., Capezzone, M., Marchisotta, S., Capuano, S., Busonero, G., Toti, P., Di Santo, A., Caruso, G., Carli, A. F., Brilli, L., Montanaro, A., & Pacini, F.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Published
2010-03-01
Volume
95
Issue
3
Pages
1365-1369
ISSN
  • 0021-972X (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7197
OpenAlex
W2030695368
Cited by
315
References
1
FWCI
22.46
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: Impact of Proto-Oncogene Mutation Detection in Cytological Specimens from Thyroid Nodules Improves the Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1210/jc.2009-2103
The paper
Cantara, S., Capezzone, M., Marchisotta, S., Capuano, S., Busonero, G., Toti, P., Di Santo, A., Caruso, G., Carli, A. F., Brilli, L., Montanaro, A., & Pacini, F. (2010). Impact of Proto-Oncogene Mutation Detection in Cytological Specimens from Thyroid Nodules Improves the Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2009-2103

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.