添加链接
link管理
链接快照平台
  • 输入网页链接,自动生成快照
  • 标签化管理网页链接
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more: PMC Disclaimer
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2023 Apr 18; 55(2): 234–242.
Published online 2023 Feb 14. Chinese. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.02.006
PMCID: PMC10091251

Language: Chinese | English

甲状腺粗针穿刺活检病理诊断的准确性评估

Evaluation of accuracy of pathological diagnosis based on thyroid core needle biopsy

熊 焰

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 熊 焰

李 鑫

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 李 鑫

梁 丽

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 梁 丽

李 东

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 李 东

鄢 丽敏

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 鄢 丽敏

李 雪迎

北京大学第一医院生物统计学室,北京 100034, Department of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 李 雪迎

邸 吉廷

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China

Find articles by 邸 吉廷

李 挺

北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China 北京大学第一医院病理科,北京 100034, Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China 北京大学第一医院生物统计学室,北京 100034, Department of Biostatistics, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_004333","term_id":"1677498630","term_text":"NM_004333"}} NM_004333 Exon 15Intron 7-10 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_020975","term_id":"1519313481","term_text":"NM_020975"}} NM_020975 Exon 7-16Intron 10-11 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_002524","term_id":"1519244088","term_text":"NM_002524"}} NM_002524 Exon 2-3 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_033360","term_id":"1621310579","term_text":"NM_033360"}} NM_033360 Exon 2-4 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_176795","term_id":"1890283274","term_text":"NM_176795"}} NM_176795 Exon 2-3 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_005163","term_id":"62241010","term_text":"NM_005163"}} NM_005163 Exon 2-7, exon 9-12 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000051","term_id":"1813755352","term_text":"NM_000051"}} NM_000051 All exon CNNB1 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_001904","term_id":"1519314571","term_text":"NM_001904"}} NM_001904 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000369","term_id":"1822178530","term_text":"NM_000369"}} NM_000369 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000038","term_id":"1519241524","term_text":"NM_000038"}} NM_000038 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_001256850","term_id":"378925624","term_text":"NM_001256850"}} NM_001256850 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_003235","term_id":"1519315825","term_text":"NM_003235"}} NM_003235 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000321","term_id":"1812654868","term_text":"NM_000321"}} NM_000321 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000244","term_id":"2199215574","term_text":"NM_000244"}} NM_000244 All exon PDGFRA {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_006206","term_id":"1519246251","term_text":"NM_006206"}} NM_006206 All exon PIK3CA {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_006218","term_id":"1519313411","term_text":"NM_006218"}} NM_006218 All exon CDKN2A {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000077","term_id":"1844139630","term_text":"NM_000077"}} NM_000077 All exon EIF1AX {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_001412","term_id":"1519314369","term_text":"NM_001412"}} NM_001412 All exon {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000314","term_id":"1732746392","term_text":"NM_000314"}} NM_000314 Exon 5-8 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000516","term_id":"1859766330","term_text":"NM_000516"}} NM_000516 Exon 8-9 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_000546","term_id":"1808862652","term_text":"NM_000546"}} NM_000546 Exon 5-9 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_198253","term_id":"1732746298","term_text":"NM_198253"}} NM_198253 Promoter (chr5: 1 295 183-1 295 302) PPARG {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_005037","term_id":"1823752903","term_text":"NM_005037"}} NM_005037 Intron 1 NTRK1 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_002529","term_id":"1890263113","term_text":"NM_002529"}} NM_002529 Intron 9, exon 12 NTRK3 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_002530","term_id":"1677539428","term_text":"NM_002530"}} NM_002530 Intron 13 {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"NM_004304","term_id":"1519313555","term_text":"NM_004304"}} NM_004304 Intron 16, intron 19

根据ClinVar(Version 2018-09-19)标准,不同的基因变异结果标记为致病性、可疑致病性、意义不明确、可能良性、良性或不确定,将致病性和可疑致病性定义为NGS阳性。

1.5. 统计学分析

以术后诊断为金标准,计算CNB术前确诊的灵敏度(sensitivity, Sen)、特异度(specificity, Spe)、阳性预测值(positive predictive value,PPV)、阴性预测值(negative predictive value,NPV)和准确率(accuracy, AC)。本文数据均采用例数和百分数进行描述。

2. 结果

2.1. 患者临床资料

本组共598例患者,男性152例,女性446例,年龄20~81岁,中位年龄48岁,363例患者小于55岁,218例患者大于55岁,17例患者55岁。所有患者在穿刺操作中均无明显不适,术后也未出现声嘶,1例患者出现甲状腺周围出血,未经处理自行缓解。

2.2. 病理学分类

598例患者的CNB分类为:Ⅰ级,0例(0.0%);Ⅱ级,40例(6.7%);Ⅲ级,40例(6.7%);Ⅳ级,32例(5.4%);Ⅴ级,35例(5.9%);Ⅵ级,451例(75.4%)。

598例患者的术后病理诊断为:良性61例(10.2%),其中滤泡腺瘤9例,结节性甲状腺肿35例,甲状腺炎17例;恶性537例(89.8%),其中滤泡癌23例,乳头状癌514例。

2.3. IHC结果

40例CNB Ⅲ级的病例中,CK19阳性31例(77.5%),Galectin-3阳性33例(82.5%),HBME-1阳性24例(60.0%),CD56阴性17例(42.5%),IHC-COMB1阳性23例(57.5%),IHC-COMB2阳性32例(80.0%),IHC-COMB3阳性38例(95.0%),见 图 1

粗针穿刺活检诊断为CNB Ⅲ级的病例匹配的手术切除标本诊断为乳头状癌的滤泡变型

A case classified as CNB Ⅲ by thyroid core needle biopsy was diagnosed as follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma in the matched resected specimen

A, tumor in the CNB sample is entirely composed of follicular structures (HE ×40); B, high magnification of the lesion shows the follicular structures lined by cells with nuclei scored 1 (HE ×200); C, cytoplasm and membrane of tumor cells in the CNB sample are diffusely reactive for CK19 with strong intensity, while the normal follicular cells are reactive with weak intensity (IHC ×200); D, cytoplasm and nuclei of tumor cells in the CNB sample are diffusely reactive for Galectin-3 with strong intensity, while the normal follicular cells are nonreactive (IHC ×200); E, membrane of tumor cells in the CNB sample are partially (about 30%) reactive for HBME-1 with intermediate intensity, while the normal follicular cells are nonreactive (IHC ×200); F, tumor cells in the CNB samples are nonreactive for CD56, while membrane and cytoplasm of the normal follicular cells are diffusely reactive with strong intensity (IHC ×200); G, tumor in the matched resected specimen is infiltrative in the desmoplastic stroma and entirely composed of follicular structures (HE ×40); H, high magnification of the lesion shows the follicular structures lined by cells with nuclei scored 3 (HE ×200). CNB, core needle biopsy; HE, hematoxylin-eosin staining; IHC, immunohistochemistry.

2.4. NGS结果

40例CNB Ⅲ级的病例中,阴性13例(32.5%),阳性27例(67.5%),其中12例为BRAFV600E点突变,5例为RAS点突变,5例为RET融合,4例为NTRK融合,1例为ALK融合。

2.5. 组织形态学确诊恶性的效率

598例患者中,CNB Ⅳ级32例,与术后诊断的32例滤泡性肿瘤完全一致,其中9例为滤泡腺瘤,23例为滤泡癌;CNB术前确诊滤泡性肿瘤的Sep为100.00%,Sen为100.00%。

除外滤泡性肿瘤,本组非滤泡肿瘤性病变共566例,其中CNB Ⅴ~Ⅵ级共486例,术后均证实为恶性,术前确诊恶性的Sen为94.55%,Spe为100.00%,PPV为100.00%,NPV为65.00%,AC为95.05%( 表 3 );CNB Ⅱ级共40例,术后仅有1例诊断为恶性,术前确诊良性的Sen为75.00%,Sep为99.80%,PPV为97.50%,NPV为97.53%,AC为97.53%( 表 4 )。

表 3

CNB Ⅴ~Ⅵ级的恶性确诊效率

Predictive value of CNB Ⅴ-Ⅵ for determining malignancy

Items Matched resected samples, n Predictive value/%
Malignant Benign Total Sen Sep PPV NPV AC
CNB, core needle biopsy; Sen, sensitivity; Spe, specificity; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; AC, accuracy.
CNB Ⅴ-Ⅵ 486 0 486 94.55 100.00 100.00 65.00 95.05
Others 28 52 80
Total 514 52 566

表 4

CNB Ⅱ级的良性确诊效率

Predictive value of CNB Ⅱ for determining benignity

Items Matched resected samples, n Predictive value/%
Malignant Benign Total Sen Sep PPV NPV AC
Abbreviations as in Table 3 .
CNB Ⅱ 39 1 40 75.00 99.80 97.50 97.53 97.53
Others 13 513 526
Total 52 514 566

2.6. 生物标记物辅助确诊恶性的效率

2.6.1. 免疫标记物辅助确诊恶性的效率

40例CNB Ⅲ级病例中,CK19阳性31例,术后确诊为恶性者25例;阴性9例,术后确诊为良性者7例;Sen为92.60%,Sep为53.85%,PPV为80.65%,NPV为77.78%,AC为80.00%。Galectin-3阳性33例,术后确诊为恶性25例;阴性7例,术后确诊为良性5例;Sen为92.60%,Sep为38.46%,PPV为75.76%,NPV为71.42%,AC为75.00%。HBME-1阳性24例,术后确诊为恶性21例;阴性16例,术后确诊为良性10例;Sen为77.78%,Sep为76.92%,PPV为87.50%,NPV为62.50%,AC为77.50%。CD56阴性17例,术后确诊为恶性17例;阳性23例,术后确诊为良性13例;Sen为62.96%,Sep为100.00%,PPV为100.00%,NPV为56.52%,AC为75.00%。IHC-COMB1阳性23例,术后确诊为恶性22例;阴性17例,术后确诊为良性12例;Sen为81.48%,Sep为92.30%,PPV为95.65%,NPV为70.59%,AC为85.00%。IHC-COMB2阳性32例,术后确诊为恶性27例;阴性8例,术后确诊为良性8例;Sen为100.00%,Sep为61.54%,PPV为84.38%,NPV为100.00%,AC为87.50%。IHC-COMB3阳性38例,术后确诊为恶性27例;阴性2例,术后确诊为良性2例;Sen为100.00%,Sep为15.38%,PPV为71.05%,NPV为100.00%,AC为72.50%( 表 5 )。

表 5

生物标记物辅助CNB Ⅲ级病例的恶性确诊效率

Predictive value of biomarkers for determining malignancy in cases of CNB Ⅲ

Items Matched resected samples, n Predictive value/%
Malignant Benign Total Sen Spe PPV NPV AC
IHC-COMB1: CD56 negative no matter how CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 positive or CD56 positive and all of CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 simultaneously positive; IHC-COMB2: CD56 negative no matter how CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 positive or CD56 positive and at least two of CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 simultaneously positive; IHC-COMB3: CD56 negative no matter how CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 positive or CD56 positive and at least one of CK19, Galectin-3 and HBME-1 simultaneously positive; CNB, core needle biopsy; IHC, immunohistochemistry; NGS, next-generation sequencing. Other abbreviations as in Table 3 .
CK19 Positive 25 6 31 92.60 53.85 80.65 77.78 80.00
Negative 2 7 9
Galectin-3 Positive 25 8 33 92.60 38.46 75.76 71.42 75.00
Negative 2 5 7
HBME-1 Positive 21 3 24 77.78 76.92 87.50 62.50 77.50
Negative 6 10 16
CD56 Negative 17 0 17 62.96 100.00 100.00 56.52 75.00
Positive 10 13 23
IHC-COMB1 Positive 22 1 23 81.48 92.30 95.65 70.59 85.00
Negative 5 12 17
IHC-COMB2 Positive 27 5 32 100.00 61.54 84.38 100.00 87.50
Negative 0 8 8
IHC-COMB3 Positive 27 11 38 100.00 15.38 71.05 100.00 72.50
Negative 0 2 2
OncoAim ® -NGS Positive 26 1 27 96.30 92.31 96.30 92.31 95.00
Negative 1 12 13
Total 27 13 40

2.6.2. 基因突变辅助确诊恶性的效率

40例CNB Ⅲ级病例中,OncoAim ® -NGS阳性27例,术后确诊为恶性26例,良性1例,对这例良性病例的手术标本行NGS,检测到了与CNB相同的NRAS突变;OncoAim ® -NGS阴性13例,术后确诊为良性12例,恶性1例,对这例恶性病例的手术标本行NGS,检测到了NRAS突变。OncoAim ® -NGS辅助CNB Ⅲ级病例确诊恶性的Sen为96.30%,Sep为92.31%,PPV为96.30%,NPV为92.31%,AC为95.00%( 表 5 )。

3. 讨论

尽管FNA目前仍然是甲状腺结节术前病理诊断的主流手段,但近10年来,CNB技术在韩国和中国的临床实践中被越来越多地应用。美国国家癌症研究所、美国临床内分泌学家协会/美国内分泌学会/美国内分泌医学会均提议将CNB用于FNA未能确诊的病例,韩国甲状腺放射学会甚至推荐将其应用于初次甲状腺结节的术前活检 [ 5 , 8 - 10 ] 。考虑到颈部解剖结构和解剖变异的复杂性,CNB应由训练有素的医生使用实时超声监测进行,我国甲状腺结节的CNB活检目前仅适合在大型医学中心开展,基层医院的推广应谨慎。

CNB标本的病理诊断具有独特性,一方面,与FNA的细胞学不同,CNB的样本是组织,诊断标准和术语理应不同;另一方面,由于取材局限,将基于手术标本建立的诊断标准应用于CNB样本又常面临困境。2015年版《世界卫生组织肺肿瘤分类》首次确立了独立于手术标本的CNB标本专用的诊断术语和标准 [ 11 ] ,这一全新的尝试在过去6年中受到病理和临床医生的广泛欢迎,其成功经验也大大鼓舞了其他亚专科对CNB样本病理诊断规范的探索。

在国际病理学界,韩国内分泌病理学甲状腺粗针穿刺工作组首先启动了甲状腺结节CNB病理诊断规范化的尝试,于2015年发布了甲状腺粗针穿刺活检病理分类 [ 12 ] :Ⅰ级,不具有诊断价值;Ⅱ级,良性;Ⅲ级,不确定;Ⅳ级,滤泡性肿瘤;Ⅴ级,可疑恶性;Ⅵ级,恶性。该分类中的诊断标准完全是基于组织形态学的特点,但却采纳了Bethesda系统的构架,这样既方便了病理医生的实践操作,又符合临床医生的工作习惯,最大限度地减少了从FNA过渡到CNB过程中给临床医生带来的困惑。2017年版《世界卫生组织内分泌肿瘤分类》不仅修订了一些甲状腺肿瘤经典类型的诊断标准,还增加了几个新的肿瘤类型 [ 6 ] ,配合这些新的变化,韩国的甲状腺粗针穿刺活检病理分类在2019年做出了相应更新 [ 5 ] 。新版的变化主要集中在Ⅲ级和Ⅳ级,尤其是细化了纯滤泡结构病例的诊断标准,对如何规范化诊断伴有乳头状癌核特点的非浸润性滤泡性甲状腺肿瘤(non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear feature, NIFTP)的CNB标本也给出了明确的建议,对推动甲状腺CNB病理诊断的规范化和提升临床参考价值发挥了非常积极的作用,但其在世界范围内的推广应用仍需多中心研究数据的支持。

本研究598例CNB标本遵循韩国的甲状腺粗针穿刺活检病理分类标准重新进行分类,结果显示,Ⅰ级病例数为0,而文献报道FNA的样本不满意率为5%~17% [ 13 ] ,CNB在这方面的优势显而易见;Ⅳ级32例,与术后诊断的32例滤泡性肿瘤完全一致,CNB术前确诊滤泡性肿瘤的Sep和Sen均为100.00%,因此,对于CNB Ⅳ级的病例推荐进一步手术切除鉴别良恶性。除去滤泡性肿瘤,本研究中非滤泡肿瘤性病变共566例,其中CNB Ⅴ~Ⅵ级486例,术后均确诊为恶性,推荐遵循恶性肿瘤的处理原则;CNB Ⅱ级40例,仅有1例术后确诊为恶性,我们将该病例CNB和术后标本的组织形态进行对比后发现,由于取材于肿瘤周边,CNB的切片全片内均为正常的甲状腺滤泡,故被诊断为良性,尽管相比于FNA,CNB的取材更为精准和充足,但仍不能完全避免取材局限性导致的漏诊,因此,CNB Ⅱ级的病例绝大部分可安心随访,极个别B超高度怀疑恶性者可考虑再次活检。由此可见,韩国的甲状腺CNB活检病理分类兼顾了CNB样本的组织学特殊性和临床医生的习惯,具有可操作性强、术前确诊率高、临床参考价值大的优点,值得推广。

本研究中CNB Ⅲ级病例共40例,不确定率6.7%,明显低于文献报道FNA的不确定率(10%~30%) [ 13 ] 。27例(67.5%)术后确诊为恶性,13例(32.5%)术后确诊为良性,良恶性病例均占了较大比例,临床策略的选择左右为难。相较于FNA,CNB不仅为病理诊断提供了更多组织形态学依据,也为进一步的生物标记物检测提供了可靠材料。本研究对如何利用生物标记物辅助这部分病例的良恶性确定,也进行了系列的探索。

IHC是病理诊断中最常用的辅助技术。对手术标本的研究显示,CK19、Galectin-3、HBME-1和CD56对鉴别甲状腺良恶性非常有帮助 [ 7 ] 。基于此,我们认为IHC可能在提高CNB Ⅲ级病例的恶性确诊率方面可能发挥作用。Song等 [ 14 ] 的研究报道,采用IHC后,FNA样本和CNB样本的不确定率分别为42.9%和11.3%。本研究以术后诊断为金标准,CD56阴性的Sep高达100.00%,因此,对CNB Ⅲ级病例进一步检测CD56,在阳性内对照存在的前提下,CD56阴性强烈提示为恶性,但阳性病例中仍有一半左右为恶性,存在Sen(62.96%)偏低的缺陷;CK19和Galectin-3的Sen相同,均为92.60%,其阴性均强烈提示为良性,但阳性病例中仍有20%~30%的病例为良性,存在Sep偏低(53.85%和38.46%)的问题。多标记物联合应用的研究显示,将CD56阴性病例纳入阳性组后,在余下CD56阳性的病例中继续筛选出其他三个标记物均阳性的病例加入阳性组,是平衡Sep(92.30%)和Sen(81.48%)的最佳策略,阳性病例强烈提示为恶性,阴性病例高度提示为良性。

近10年来,甲状腺癌的基因学研究成果斐然。2014年,癌症基因组图谱(the Cancer Genome Atlas,TCGA)首次描绘了乳头状癌基因组的全貌,90%的乳头状癌具有独特的分子改变,其中BRAFV600E突变、RAS突变、RET融合和TERT突变为常见变异,而EIF1AX突变、ALK融合和NTRK1/NTRK3融合为罕见变异 [ 15 ] 。之后,滤泡癌、低分化癌和间变性癌的基因型也陆续被报道。在滤泡癌中,RAS突变、PPARγ融合和TERT突变为常见变异,而BRAFK601E突变和EIF1AX突变为罕见变异。在低分化和间变性癌中,则常可检测到BRAFV600E突变、RAS突变、TERT突变和TP53突变 [ 16 - 17 ] 。基于对甲状腺癌突变谱的认识,各研究小组试图通过检测不同的基因组合来提高形态学不确定的活检样本的恶性确诊率,研究结果显示,在FNA样本中,Sen和Sep分别为63%~94%和52%~99% [ 18 - 19 ] 。然而,无论Sen或Sep如何,临床实践中应用基因检测辅助FNA标本的诊断都存在较大问题,比如需要在最初的穿刺过程中专门收集样本,增加了操作的繁琐性;对检测样本中是否有肿瘤细胞未知,因而降低了阴性结果解读的客观性。与之相反,CNB样本均以石蜡块的形式保存,可以随时提取DNA进行基因检测,并同时对样本中是否有肿瘤成分以及所占比例进行评估,减少了肿瘤成分不足导致的结果偏差。因此,基因检测在CNB样本中比FNA样本中更能有效辅助形态学不确定病例的恶性确诊。以往文献有关基因检测在甲状腺CNB病理诊断中应用的报道很少,仅有少数单一突变的研究 [ 19 - 23 ] 。本研究采用OncoAim ® 甲状腺癌多基因检测试剂盒,采用NGS检测CNB样本的26个基因,覆盖了甲状腺癌常见基因突变,当检测到致病性或可能致病性突变时样本记录为NGS阳性。对40例CNB Ⅲ级样本进行检测,以术后诊断为金标准,NGS具有很高的Sep(92.31%)和Sen(96.30%),阳性强烈提示为恶性,阴性强烈提示为良性。13例CNB样本NGS阴性的病例中,仅有1例手术样本诊断为恶性,该例手术标本中却检测到了NRAS突变,复阅该病例的CNB切片,发现肿瘤成分仅占全部送检组织的3%,是导致CNB样本NGS检测结果假阴性的原因,幸运的是该病例的CNB样本CD56阴性,CK19、Galectin-3和HBME-1均阳性,符合恶性的免疫标记特点。因此,应用生物标记物辅助CNB Ⅲ级样本的良恶性鉴别时,必须在实验前对肿瘤成分占比进行评估,当小于5%时,不建议首选NGS而推荐IHC。27例CNB样本NGS阳性的病例中,有1例手术样本诊断为良性,该例手术标本检测到了与CNB相同的NRAS突变,复阅该病例的CNB切片,组织结构为纯微滤泡,细胞核评分1分,全片内没有包膜和正常甲状腺滤泡,符合CNB Ⅲ级的诊断标准;手术标本的肿瘤最大径为1 cm,包膜完整,全部取材制片,组织形态与CNB样本一致,未见包膜和血管浸润,符合滤泡腺瘤的诊断标准。以往文献报道,形态学上符合滤泡腺瘤诊断标准的病例中,约有30%可检测到 RAS 基因的突变,这部分病例究竟是特殊的腺瘤还是腺癌的早期,目前仍不清楚,尚需积累更多的病例深入研究 [ 24 ] 。在此需要特别说明的是,NGS不是一种通用的技术,不同的实验室可能使用不同的基因组合、检测平台和方法,因此,NGS的结果在很大程度上取决于每个实验室的技术细节。对病理医生来说,通过整合文献报道和实验室数据知识来解释NGS结果是一种合适的方法。本研究中所有关于NGS的数据和分析都是基于商业化的OncoAim ® 甲状腺多基因检测试剂盒。

本研究中,IHC和NGS单独应用,对CNB Ⅲ级病例的恶性确诊均具有很好的Sen和Sep,故没有常规联合应用的必要性。综合经济和时间成本,生物标记物辅助CNB Ⅲ级病例诊断的推荐流程为:首选IHC,CD56阴性或CD56阳性的同时其他三种标记均为阳性的病例倾向为恶性,其他病例在肿瘤成分占比大于5%的情况下,进一步行NGS检测,NGS阳性的病例倾向为恶性,IHC和NGS均为阴性的病例则倾向为良性。

综上所述,CNB作为甲状腺结节的术前活检手段,随着技术的进步,患者在操作中的疼痛感、耐受性和并发症与FNA已没有显著差异;获得的样本对于甲状腺结节的术前确诊优于FNA;甲状腺CNB样本的病理诊断既有别于FNA样本又不同于手术样本,其独特性需要与之相匹配的诊断标准和术语,以确保病理诊断的一致性,在此基础上方便临床医生理解和做出符合规范的处理;韩国内分泌病理学甲状腺粗针穿刺工作组推荐的甲状腺粗针穿刺活检病理分类,兼顾了CNB样本的组织学特殊性和临床医生的习惯,具有可操作性强、术前确诊率高、临床参考价值大的优点,值得推广;遵循该分类标准,诊断为Ⅳ级的病例均应推荐进一步手术切除鉴别良恶性,诊断为Ⅴ和Ⅵ级的病例推荐遵循恶性肿瘤的处理原则,诊断为Ⅱ级的病例绝大部分可安心随访,极个别B超高度怀疑恶性者可考虑再次活检,诊断为Ⅲ级的病例应用生物标记物检测可高效辅助良恶性的诊断。

志谢

感谢鹍远生物公司的李扬技师给予本研究的支持和帮助。

Funding Statement

北京大学第一医院青年临床研究专项(2019CR24)

Funding Statement

Supported by the Youth Clinical Research Project of Peking University First Hospital (2019CR24)

References

1. Teng WLY, Gao M, Huang G, et al. Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid carcinomas. Chin J Endocrinol Metab. 2012; 28 (10):779–797. [ Google Scholar ]
2. Pitman MB, Abele J, Ali SZ, et al. Techniques for thyroid FNA: A synopsis of the National Cancer Institute Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspiration State of the Science Conference. Diagn Cytopathol. 2008; 36 (6):407–424. doi: 10.1002/dc.20829. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
3. Suster S. Controversies regarding the interpretation of follicular thyroid nodules. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2019; 143 (12):1472–1476. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0301-RA. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
4. Ha EJ, Baek JH, Lee JH, et al. Complications following US-guided core-needle biopsy for thyroid lesions: A retrospective study of 6 169 consecutive patients with 6 687 thyroid nodules. Eur Radiol. 2017; 27 (3):1186–1194. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4461-9. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
5. Jung CK, Baek JH, Na DG, et al. 2019 Practice guidelines for thyroid core needle biopsy: A report of the Clinical Practice Guidelines Development Committee of the Korean Thyroid Association. J Pathol Transl Med. 2020; 54 (1):64–86. doi: 10.4132/jptm.2019.12.04. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
6. Lloyd RV, Osamura RY, Klöppel G. WHO classification of tumours of endocrine organs. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC); 2017. pp. 65–142. [ Google Scholar ]
7. Dunderovic D, Lipkovski JM, Boricic I, et al. Defining the value of CD56, CK19, Galectin 3 and HBME-1 in diagnosis of follicular cell derived lesions of thyroid with systematic review of literature. Diagn Pathol. 2015; 10 :196. doi: 10.1186/s13000-015-0428-4. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
8. Gharib H, Papini E, Garber JR, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American College of Endocrinology, and Associazione Medici Endocrinologi Medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules: 2016 update. Endocr Pract. 2016; 22 (5):622–639. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
9. Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association Management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: The American Thyroid Association Guidelines Task Force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016; 26 (1):1–133. doi: 10.1089/thy.2015.0020. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
10. Na DG, Baek JH, Jung SL, et al. Core needle biopsy of the thyroid: 2016 Consensus Statement and Recommendations from Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology. Korean J Radiol. 2017; 18 (1):217–237. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2017.18.1.217. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
11. Travis WDBE, Burke AP, Marx A, et al. WHO classification of tumurs of the lung, pleura, thymus and hear. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC); 2015. pp. 29–36. [ Google Scholar ]
12. Jung CK, Min HS, Park HJ, et al. Pathology reporting of thyroid core needle biopsy: A proposal of the Korean Endocrine Pathology Thyroid Core Needle Biopsy Study Group. J Pathol Transl Med. 2015; 49 (4):288–299. doi: 10.4132/jptm.2015.06.04. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
13. Wolinski K, Stangierski A, Ruchala M. Comparison of diagnostic yield of core-needle and fine-needle aspiration biopsies of thyroid lesions: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2017; 27 (1):431–436. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4356-9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
14. Song S, Kim H, Ahn SH. Role of immunohistochemistry in fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy of thyroid nodules. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol. 2019; 12 (2):224–230. doi: 10.21053/ceo.2018.01011. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
15. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network Integrated genomic characterization of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Cell. 2014; 159 (3):676–690. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.09.050. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
16. D'Cruz AK, Vaish R, Vaidya A, et al. Molecular markers in well-differentiated thyroid cancer. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018; 275 (6):1375–1384. doi: 10.1007/s00405-018-4944-1. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
17. Landa I, Ibrahimpasic T, Boucai L, et al. Genomic and transcriptomic hallmarks of poorly differentiated and anaplastic thyroid cancers. J Clin Invest. 2016; 126 (3):1052–1066. doi: 10.1172/JCI85271. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
18. Patel KN, Angell TE, Babiarz J, et al. Performance of a genomic sequencing classifier for the preoperative diagnosis of cytologically indeterminate thyroid nodules. JAMA Surg. 2018; 153 (9):817–824. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1153. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
19. Sadowski SM, Petrenko V, Meyer P, et al. Validation of molecular biomarkers for preoperative diagnostics of human papillary thyroid carcinoma in fine needle aspirates. Gland Surg. 2019; 8 (Suppl 2):S62–S76. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
20. Choi SH, Baek JH, Lee JH, et al. Evaluation of the clinical usefulness of BRAFV600E mutation analysis of core-needle biopsy specimens in thyroid nodules with previous atypia of undetermined significance or follicular lesions of undetermined significance results. Thyroid. 2015; 25 (8):897–903. doi: 10.1089/thy.2014.0606. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
21. Choi SH, Baek JH, Lee JH, et al. Initial clinical experience with BRAF(V600E) mutation analysis of core-needle biopsy specimens from thyroid nodules. Clin Endocrinol. 2016; 84 (4):607–613. doi: 10.1111/cen.12866. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
22. Crescenzi A, Trimboli P, Modica DC, et al. Preoperative assessment of TERT promoter mutation on thyroid core needle biopsies supports diagnosis of malignancy and addresses surgical strategy. Horm Metab Res. 2016; 48 (3):157–162. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
23. Jang EK, Kim WG, Kim EY, et al. Usefulness of NRAS codon 61 mutation analysis and core needle biopsy for the diagnosis of thyroid nodules previously diagnosed as atypia of undetermined significance. Endocrine. 2016; 52 (2):305–312. doi: 10.1007/s12020-015-0773-9. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
24. Marotta V, Bifulco M, Vitale M. Significance of RAS mutations in thyroid benign nodules and non-medullary thyroid cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (15):3785. doi: 10.3390/cancers13153785. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Articles from Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) are provided here courtesy of Editorial Office of Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban, Peking University Health Science Center