Comparison of differentiated thyroid carcinoma staging systems in a Spanish population

Abstract

Abstract Background and objective Differentiated thyroid carcinoma staging is increasingly important due to the current trends to a less intensive therapy in low-risk patients. The TNM system is most widely used, but other systems based on follow-up of several patient cohorts have been developed. When these systems have been applied to other populations, results have been discordant. Our study evaluates the suitability of several differentiated thyroid carcinoma staging systems in a Spanish population. Material and method 729 patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma and staging data available were enrolled. Mean follow-up time was 10.8 years. The TNM, EORTC, AMES, Clinical class, MACIS, Ohio, NTCTCS, and Spanish systems were applied to all histological types. The Kaplan–Meier survival curves for each system were analyzed, and compared using the proportion of explained variation (PEV). Results The demographic and clinical characteristics of our population were similar to those of other Spanish and international cohorts reported. The best systems were NTCTCS, with 74.7% PEV, and TNM (68.3%), followed by the Ohio, MACIS, EORTC, and AMES systems with minimal differences between them, while the least adequate were the Spanish (55.2%) and Clinical class (47.1%) systems. Conclusion The NTCTCS staging system was found to be better than TNM in our population but, because of its simplicity and greater dissemination, the TNM appears to be recommended for staging of patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma.