Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case

BackgroundIt has been debated whether familial non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (FNMTC) is more aggressive and has a worse prognosis than sporadic non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (SNMTC). Our aim was to compare the invasiveness and prognosis of FNMTC and SNMTC by their biological behavior and molecul...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Tian Yang, Longsheng Huang, Chang Chen, Han Luo, Yong Jiang
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:	familial non-medullary thyroid carcinomas clinicopathological characteristics BRAF V600E TERT promoter papillary thyroid cancer Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/296a2e89be4e43b7a53491010900f520
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:296a2e89be4e43b7a53491010900f520
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:296a2e89be4e43b7a53491010900f5202021-12-02T00:00:25ZComparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case2234-943X10.3389/fonc.2021.616974https://doaj.org/article/296a2e89be4e43b7a53491010900f5202021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2021.616974/fullhttps://doaj.org/toc/2234-943XBackgroundIt has been debated whether familial non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (FNMTC) is more aggressive and has a worse prognosis than sporadic non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (SNMTC). Our aim was to compare the invasiveness and prognosis of FNMTC and SNMTC by their biological behavior and molecular changes.Method and MaterialOur group mainly compared 106 patients with FNMTC whom have complete clinicopathological data during 2011–2019 in West China Hospital, Sichuan University, and 212 randomly selected cases with SNMTC were included to compare their biological behavior, recurrence and mortality, and molecular expression of BRAF V600E and TERT promoter. At the same time, FNMTC cases were divided into four subgroups, namely, two affected members group, three or more affected members, parent/offspring group, and sibling group, and they were compared with SNMTC separately to analyze the difference in their invasiveness and prognosis.ResultsWe found that the mean tumor size of FNMTC (0.96 ± 0.53cm) was smaller than that of SNMTC (1.15 ± 0.72 cm) (p = 0.020), while no significant difference in the incidence of other clinicopathological factors, including bilateral growth, capsular invasion, with thyroid nodular goiter or not, multifocality, lymph node metastasis, extrathyroidal extension, iodine 131 treatments, T stage, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, was observed between FNMTC and SNMTC (p > 0.05), between each FNMTC subgroup (p > 0.05), and between each FNMTC subgroup and SNMTC (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in recurrence, mortality, and BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutation between FNMTC and SNMTC, among which 50/60 (83.33%) of FNMTC patients had BRAF V600E mutation and 1/32 (3.13%) had TERT promoter mutation, while the mutation rates of SNMTC were 93/108 (86.11%) and 3/64 (4.69%) (p > 0.05).ConclusionThere was no significant difference in invasiveness and prognosis between FNMTC and SNMTC by biological behavior, patient survival, and molecular level comparison.Tian YangTian YangLongsheng HuangLongsheng HuangChang ChenHan LuoYong JiangFrontiers Media S.A.articlefamilial non-medullary thyroid carcinomasclinicopathological characteristicsBRAF V600ETERT promoterpapillary thyroid cancerNeoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogensRC254-282ENFrontiers in Oncology, Vol 11 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	familial non-medullary thyroid carcinomas clinicopathological characteristics BRAF V600E TERT promoter papillary thyroid cancer Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282
spellingShingle	familial non-medullary thyroid carcinomas clinicopathological characteristics BRAF V600E TERT promoter papillary thyroid cancer Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens RC254-282 Tian Yang Tian Yang Longsheng Huang Longsheng Huang Chang Chen Han Luo Yong Jiang Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
description	BackgroundIt has been debated whether familial non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (FNMTC) is more aggressive and has a worse prognosis than sporadic non-medullary thyroid carcinoma (SNMTC). Our aim was to compare the invasiveness and prognosis of FNMTC and SNMTC by their biological behavior and molecular changes.Method and MaterialOur group mainly compared 106 patients with FNMTC whom have complete clinicopathological data during 2011–2019 in West China Hospital, Sichuan University, and 212 randomly selected cases with SNMTC were included to compare their biological behavior, recurrence and mortality, and molecular expression of BRAF V600E and TERT promoter. At the same time, FNMTC cases were divided into four subgroups, namely, two affected members group, three or more affected members, parent/offspring group, and sibling group, and they were compared with SNMTC separately to analyze the difference in their invasiveness and prognosis.ResultsWe found that the mean tumor size of FNMTC (0.96 ± 0.53cm) was smaller than that of SNMTC (1.15 ± 0.72 cm) (p = 0.020), while no significant difference in the incidence of other clinicopathological factors, including bilateral growth, capsular invasion, with thyroid nodular goiter or not, multifocality, lymph node metastasis, extrathyroidal extension, iodine 131 treatments, T stage, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, was observed between FNMTC and SNMTC (p > 0.05), between each FNMTC subgroup (p > 0.05), and between each FNMTC subgroup and SNMTC (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in recurrence, mortality, and BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutation between FNMTC and SNMTC, among which 50/60 (83.33%) of FNMTC patients had BRAF V600E mutation and 1/32 (3.13%) had TERT promoter mutation, while the mutation rates of SNMTC were 93/108 (86.11%) and 3/64 (4.69%) (p > 0.05).ConclusionThere was no significant difference in invasiveness and prognosis between FNMTC and SNMTC by biological behavior, patient survival, and molecular level comparison.
format	article
author	Tian Yang Tian Yang Longsheng Huang Longsheng Huang Chang Chen Han Luo Yong Jiang
author_facet	Tian Yang Tian Yang Longsheng Huang Longsheng Huang Chang Chen Han Luo Yong Jiang
author_sort	Tian Yang
title	Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
title_short	Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
title_full	Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
title_fullStr	Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case
title_sort	comparison between clinicopathological characteristics, braf v600e and tert promoter mutation of familial non-medullary thyroid carcinomas, and sporadic case
publisher	Frontiers Media S.A.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/296a2e89be4e43b7a53491010900f520
work_keys_str_mv	AT tianyang comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT tianyang comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT longshenghuang comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT longshenghuang comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT changchen comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT hanluo comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase AT yongjiang comparisonbetweenclinicopathologicalcharacteristicsbrafv600eandtertpromotermutationoffamilialnonmedullarythyroidcarcinomasandsporadiccase
_version_	1718403972700569600

Comparison Between Clinicopathological Characteristics, BRAF V600E and TERT Promoter Mutation of Familial Non-Medullary Thyroid Carcinomas, and Sporadic Case

Ejemplares similares