Title

Prevalence of differentiated thyroid cancer in autopsy studies over six decades: A meta-analysis

Date of this Version

9-6-2016

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Details

Citation only

Furuya-Kanamori, L., Bell, K. J. L., Clark, J., Glasziou, P., & Doi, S. A. R. (2016, in press). Prevalence of differentiated thyroid cancer in autopsy studies over six decades: A meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1-15.

Access the journal

Copyright © 2016 American Society of Clinical Oncology.

ISSN

1527-7755

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) incidence has been reported to have increased three- to 15-fold in the past few decades. It is unclear whether this represents overdiagnosis or a true increase in incidence. Therefore, the current study aimed to estimate the prevalence of incidental DTC in published autopsy series and determine whether this prevalence has been increasing over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 2015 for relevant studies. Two authors searched for all autopsy studies that had included patients with no known history of thyroid pathology and reported the prevalence of incidental DTC (iDTC). Two authors independently extracted the data, and discrepancies were resolved by another author. The pooled prevalence of iDTC was assessed using a fixed-effects meta-analysis model with robust error variance. The time effect was studied using an inverse-variance weighted logit-linear regression model with robust error variance and a time variable.

RESULTS:

Thirty-five studies, conducted between 1949 and 2007, met the inclusion criteria and contributed 42 data sets and 12,834 autopsies. The prevalence of iDTC among the partial and whole examination subgroups was 4.1% (95% CI, 3.0% to 5.4%) and 11.2% (95% CI, 6.7% to 16.1%), respectively. Once the intensiveness of thyroid examination was accounted for in the regression model, the prevalence odds ratio stabilized from 1970 onward, and no time effect was observed.

CONCLUSION:

The current study confirms that iDTC is common, but the observed increasing incidence is not mirrored by prevalence within autopsy studies and, therefore, is unlikely to reflect a true population-level increase in tumorigenesis. This strongly suggests that the current increasing incidence of iDTC most likely reflects diagnostic detection increasing over time.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

This document has been peer reviewed.