Performance of Afirma genomic sequencing classifier and histopathological outcome in Bethesda category III thyroid nodules: Initial versus repeat fine-needle aspiration.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data comparing the performance of Afirma Genomic Sequencing Classifier (GSC) in thyroid nodules carrying an initial versus a repeat diagnosis of atypia of undetermined significance (AUS). This study reported an institutional experience in this regard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive thyroid nodules that had an initial or a repeat AUS diagnosis and had a subsequent GSC diagnostic result (benign or suspicious) from 2017 to 2021. All nodules were followed by surgical intervention or by clinical and/or ultrasound monitoring. GSC's benign call rate (BCR), rate of histology-proven malignancy associated with a suspicious GSC result, and diagnostic parameters of GSC were calculated and compared between the two cohorts (initial versus repeat AUS). Statistical significance was defined with a p-value of <.05 for all analysis. RESULTS: A total of 202 cases fulfilled inclusion criteria, including 67 and 135 thyroid nodules with an initial and a repeat AUS diagnosis, respectively. BCR was 67% and 66% in initial and repeat AUS cohorts, respectively. Rate of histology-proven malignancy associated with a suspicious GSC result were 22% and 24% in initial and repeat AUS cohorts, respectively. Compared with the repeat AUS cohort, the initial AUS cohort showed slightly lower sensitivity (83% vs. 100%), specificity (70% vs. 73%), PPV (23% vs. 24%), NPV (98% vs. 100%), and diagnostic accuracy (72% vs. 75%). Nevertheless, these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: GSC demonstrated comparable performance in thyroid nodules with a repeat AUS diagnosis versus nodules with an initial AUS diagnosis.

IMPROVING AFTER-HOURS CALLS TO ENDOCRINOLOGY FELLOWS.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the frequency and nature of after-hours calls to endocrinology fellows and employ interventions to direct appropriate care to primary endocrinologists. METHODS: The on-call fellows logged calls that came to them during the after-hours and marked them as urgent or nonurgent. We analyzed these calls and then implemented interventions to educate patients on calls that can wait until the next business day. We also trained providers to provide script refills during clinic visits and educated fellows on how to best manage and document these after-hours calls. RESULTS: From July to August 2017, 100 calls were logged. The average number of calls per 24 hours was 1.61, and 47% were marked nonurgent. From January to March 2018, the fellows logged 0.64 calls per 24 hours, and 51% were logged as nonurgent. Most of these calls were for insulin and testing supply refills. CONCLUSION: Many after-hours calls to the fellows were nonurgent and could have waited until the next business day. Our continuing interventions aim at improving both physician and patient satisfaction, as well as patient care.