We have located links that may give you full text access.
Enhanced predictive validity of integrative models for refractory hyperthyroidism considering baseline and early therapy characteristics: a prospective cohort study.
Journal of Translational Medicine 2024 March 30
BACKGROUND: A subset of Graves' disease (GD) patients develops refractory hyperthyroidism, posing challenges in treatment decisions. The predictive value of baseline characteristics and early therapy indicators in identifying high risk individuals is an area worth exploration.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study (2018-2022) involved 597 newly diagnosed adult GD patients undergoing methimazole (MMI) treatment. Baseline characteristics and 3-month therapy parameters were utilized to develop predictive models for refractory GD, considering antithyroid drug (ATD) dosage regimens.
RESULTS: Among 346 patients analyzed, 49.7% developed ATD-refractory GD, marked by recurrence and sustained Thyrotropin Receptor Antibody (TRAb) positivity. Key baseline factors, including younger age, Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO), larger goiter size, and higher initial free triiodothyronine (fT3), free thyroxine (fT4), and TRAb levels, were all significantly associated with an increased risk of refractory GD, forming the baseline predictive model (Model A). Subsequent analysis based on MMI cumulative dosage at 3 months resulted in two subgroups: a high cumulative dosage group (average ≥ 20 mg/day) and a medium-low cumulative dosage group (average < 20 mg/day). Absolute values, percentage changes, and cumulative values of thyroid function and autoantibodies at 3 months were analyzed. Two combined predictive models, Model B (high cumulative dosage) and Model C (medium-low cumulative dosage), were developed based on stepwise regression and multivariate analysis, incorporating additional 3-month parameters beyond the baseline. In both groups, these combined models outperformed the baseline model in terms of discriminative ability (measured by AUC), concordance with actual outcomes (66.2% comprehensive improvement), and risk classification accuracy (especially for Class I and II patients with baseline predictive risk < 71%). The reliability of the above models was confirmed through additional analysis using random forests. This study also explored ATD dosage regimens, revealing differences in refractory outcomes between predicted risk groups. However, adjusting MMI dosage after early risk assessment did not conclusively improve the prognosis of refractory GD.
CONCLUSION: Integrating baseline and early therapy characteristics enhances the predictive capability for refractory GD outcomes. The study provides valuable insights into refining risk assessment and guiding personalized treatment decisions for GD patients.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study (2018-2022) involved 597 newly diagnosed adult GD patients undergoing methimazole (MMI) treatment. Baseline characteristics and 3-month therapy parameters were utilized to develop predictive models for refractory GD, considering antithyroid drug (ATD) dosage regimens.
RESULTS: Among 346 patients analyzed, 49.7% developed ATD-refractory GD, marked by recurrence and sustained Thyrotropin Receptor Antibody (TRAb) positivity. Key baseline factors, including younger age, Graves' ophthalmopathy (GO), larger goiter size, and higher initial free triiodothyronine (fT3), free thyroxine (fT4), and TRAb levels, were all significantly associated with an increased risk of refractory GD, forming the baseline predictive model (Model A). Subsequent analysis based on MMI cumulative dosage at 3 months resulted in two subgroups: a high cumulative dosage group (average ≥ 20 mg/day) and a medium-low cumulative dosage group (average < 20 mg/day). Absolute values, percentage changes, and cumulative values of thyroid function and autoantibodies at 3 months were analyzed. Two combined predictive models, Model B (high cumulative dosage) and Model C (medium-low cumulative dosage), were developed based on stepwise regression and multivariate analysis, incorporating additional 3-month parameters beyond the baseline. In both groups, these combined models outperformed the baseline model in terms of discriminative ability (measured by AUC), concordance with actual outcomes (66.2% comprehensive improvement), and risk classification accuracy (especially for Class I and II patients with baseline predictive risk < 71%). The reliability of the above models was confirmed through additional analysis using random forests. This study also explored ATD dosage regimens, revealing differences in refractory outcomes between predicted risk groups. However, adjusting MMI dosage after early risk assessment did not conclusively improve the prognosis of refractory GD.
CONCLUSION: Integrating baseline and early therapy characteristics enhances the predictive capability for refractory GD outcomes. The study provides valuable insights into refining risk assessment and guiding personalized treatment decisions for GD patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app