Patients Characteristics.
A total of 378 patients were enrolled in this study. There were 264 females and 114 males patients,and the ratio of female to male is 2.32:1. The age of the patients ranged from 10 to 72 years, and the mean age of 39.96 years. 88.89% of patients are younger than 55 years old; Among all patients, 95(25.13%) patients exhibited capsule invasion, and 69(18.25%)patients presented ETE. Bilaterality was detected in 119(30.95%)patients and HT was detected in 87(23.16%)patients. Multifocal tumors (n=84,22.22%) were less common than solitary tumors (n=294,77.78%). Primary tumor location was divided into upper (n= 92), middle (n= 180), and lower portion (n =106). According to the American Thyroid Association 2015 guidelines, T1, T2, T3 and T4 were found in 219, 48, 83 and 28 patients, respectively. The primary tumor size less than 1cm was detected in 142 patients. The mean number of total central neck lymph nodes and lateral neck lymph nodes was 7.51± 5.08, 18.25±12.59, respectively. (Table 1).
Among all patients, 45 (11.9%) patients were presented skip metastasis as lateral LNM without central LNM. The distributions of skip metastasis are shown in Table 2, The single-level metastasis(n=21) was the most common pattern for lateral LNM, followed by double-level metastasis(n=16), triple-level metastasis(n=7) and four-level metastasis(n=1). A further analysis showed that the level III and IV were the most involved sites whether in single-level metastasis or double-level metastasis. (Table 2)
Table 1: Demographics and clinical characteristics of PTC patients(n=378)
Variable
|
Results
|
Sex male
female
|
114(30.16%)
264(69.84%)
|
Age ≧55 years
<55 years
|
42(11.11%)
336(88.89%)
|
Age (mean ± SD, years)
Multifocality Yes
No
Bilaterality
Yes
No
Primary tumor location
Upper
Middle
lower
HT Yes
No
ETE Yes
No
Capsule invasion Yes
No
Tumor extension T1
T2
T3
T4
Primary tumor size≦1cm Yes
No
Total tumor size (mean ± SD, cm)
Skip metastasis Yes
No
Number of central dissected lymph nodes
Number of lateral dissected lymph nodes
|
39.96±11.73
84(22.22%)
294(77.78%)
117(30.95%)
261(69.05%)
92(24.34%)
180(47.62%)
106 (28.04%)
87(23.16%)
291(76.98%)
69(18.25%)
309(81.75%)
95(25.13%)
291(76.98%)
219(57.94%)
48(12.70%)
83(21.96%)
28(7.41%)
142(37.57%)
236(62.43%)
1.56±0.96
45(62.43%)
333(62.43%)
7.51± 5.08
18.25±12.59
|
|
|
|
Abbreviations: HT: Hashimoto’s thyroiditis; ETE: extrathyroidal extension; SD: standard deviation;
Table 2: Distribution of skip metastasis
Neck level
|
No
|
Single level (n = 21)
Ⅱ
Ⅲ
Ⅳ
|
2
10
9
|
Double level (n = 16)
Ⅱ +Ⅲ
Ⅱ +Ⅳ
Ⅲ +Ⅳ
Ⅲ +Ⅴ
Ⅳ +Ⅴ
|
4
1
9
1
1
|
Triple level (n = 7)
Ⅱ+ Ⅲ+ Ⅳ
Ⅲ +Ⅳ +Ⅴ
|
4
3
|
Four level (n = 1)
Ⅱ +Ⅲ +Ⅳ +Ⅴ
|
1
|
Total
|
45
|
Clinicopathologic risk factors for skip metastasis
Univariate analysis demonstrated that age, primary tumor location, Primary tumor size≦1cm were associated with skip metastasis(all P <0.05).The age in patients with skip metastasis were significantly older than the patients with absented skip metastasis (44.48±12.556 vs. 39.37±11.509, P = 0.006). When the primary located in the superior, middle, inferior portion of the thyroid, the incidence of skip metastasis was 7.41%, 2.38%, 1.85%, respectively. In addition, the primary tumor size not larger than 1cm was more frequent in skip metastasis (54.55% vs.35.33%, P =0.013). (Table 3).
To identify the independent risk factors of skip metastasis in PTC patients, variables with statistical differences were incorporated in multivariate analysis. We found that Primary tumor size ≦1cm(OR=2.703, 95%CI,1342-5.464; P=0.005 ), Primary tumor location in the upper portion(OR=6.799, 95%CI, 2.710-17.060, P < 0.001), Age(OR=1.051, 95%CI,1.017-1.805, P=0.005)were found to be independent factors for skip metastasis in PTC patients.(Table 4).
Table 3: Univariate analysis of risk factors for skip metastasis in PTC patients
Variable
|
Skip metastasis
|
Χ2/t
|
P-value
|
Present(n=45)
|
Absent(n=333)
|
Sex (male/female)
|
9/35
|
105/229
|
2.23
|
0.136
|
Age(≧55 years/<55 years)
|
8/36
|
34/300
|
2.52
|
O.112
|
Age
|
44.48±12.56
|
39.37±11.51
|
2.74
|
0.006
|
Multifocality (Yes/No)
|
7/37
|
77/257
|
1.15
|
0.284
|
Bilaterality (Yes/No)
|
16/28
|
101/233
|
0.68
|
0.409
|
Primary tumor location upper/middle/lower
|
28/9/7
|
64/171/99
|
41.93
|
<0.001
|
HT(Yes/No)
|
9/35
|
78/256
|
0.18
|
0.668
|
ETE(Yes/No)
|
8/36
|
61/273
|
0.001
|
0.989
|
Capsule invasion (Yes/No)
|
11/33
|
84/258
|
0.001
|
0.983
|
Tumor extension(T1/T2/T3/T4)
|
23/7/12/2
|
196/41/71/26
|
1.87
|
0.6
|
Primary tumor size≦1cm
(Yes/No)
|
24/20
|
118/216
|
6.12
|
0.013
|
Total tumor size/cm
|
1.31±0.87
|
1.59±0.97
|
1.79
|
0.075
|
Number of central dissected lymph nodes
|
6.47±4.59
|
7.65±5.14
|
1.46
|
0.144
|
Number of lateral dissected lymph nodes
|
16.89±10.12
|
18.44.47±12.98
|
0.77
|
0.439
|
Abbreviations: HT: Hashimoto’s thyroiditis; ETE: extrathyroidal extension;
Table 4:Multivariate analysis of risk factors for skip metastasis in PTC patients
Variable
|
OR (95% CI)
|
P-value
|
Age
|
1.051(1.017-1.805)
|
0.003
|
Primary tumor location
Lower as reference
Middle
upper
|
0.678(0.241-1.912)
6.799(2.710-17.060)
|
0.463
<0.001
|
Primary tumor size≦1cm (Yes/No)
|
2.703(1.342-5.464)
|
0.005
|
Construction of an Individualized Prediction Model
Based on the results of multivariate analysis, we established a nomogram model for predicting skip metastasis, As shown in Figure 1. We can predict the probability of skip metastasis in patients by summing the scores of each variable. Older patients, Primary tumor location in the upper portion and Primary tumor size ≦1cm had higher scores. For example, a 55-years-older (69 points) PTC patient with a 7mm tumor (31points) located in the upper portion(72points), has a about 60% possibility (total points,172) of skip metastasis. The risk of skip metastasis predicted by this nomogram ranged from 0.01 to 0.8.
Model performance and clinical utility of the nomogram
To test its consistency and discrimination, the nomogram model was calibrated by Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and calibration plot. the internal calibration plot showed a mostly perfect agreement between the predicted and actual results of the nomogram model, as shown in Figure 2. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test also showed an excellent concordance between the predicted and actual outcomes (χ2=5.89, df=8, p =0.66). ROC curves and C-index values were used to test the discrimination of the nomogram model, The C⁃index value is 0.806 and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.806 (95% CI, 0.736–0.876) indicated good discrimination of the model (Figure 3). In the decision curve analysis (DCA) curve, when the skip metastasis of threshold probability was ranged from 0.04 to 0.78, the nomogram model achieved a greater net benefit than the “None” or “All”. (Figure 4).
Nomograms show the likelihood of skip metastasis as a percentage, we assigned a Youden-derived cutoff value to the nomogram. The optimal cutoff value was -2.374. (sensitivity: 79.5%; specificity: 67.7%; accuracy: 69.0%; negative predictive value: 96.2%; positive predictive value: 24.5%).