Methods
Presentation of results and recommendations
Table 1 presents the organization of the Task Force’s results, recommendations, and definitions. Readers of the print version are referred to the page number for information about specific topics, recommendations, and definitions. The location key can be used if viewing the guidelines in a file or web page. Each location key is unique and can be copied into the Find or Search functions to rapidly navigate to the section of interest. Specific recommendations and definitions are presented as bulleted points in the main body of this scholarly guidelines dialog. Table 2 presents a guide to the abbreviations used.
Table 1. Organization of Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma Guidelines, Recommendations, and Definitions
| Location keya |
Page
|
Section | Subsection | R or D number |
| [A] |
568
|
Background |
|
|
| [B] |
569
|
Initial diagnosis and therapy of preclinical disease in MEN 2 syndromes |
|
|
| [B1] |
569
|
Clinical manifestations and syndromes of RET mutations in MEN 2A |
D1
|
|
| [B2] |
570
|
Clinical manifestations and syndromes of RET mutations in FMTC |
D2
|
|
| [B3] |
572
|
Clinical manifestations and syndromes of RET mutations in MEN 2B |
D3
|
|
| [B4] |
573
|
Role of germline RET testing in MTC patients |
R1–R5
|
|
| [B5] |
574
|
Prophylactic thyroidectomy |
R6–R8
|
|
| [B6] |
575
|
RET testing in asymptomatic people |
R9–R10
|
|
| [B7] |
576
|
RET testing methodologies |
R11–R15
|
|
| [B8] |
576
|
Genetic testing: privacy vs. notification of potentially affected family members |
R16
|
|
| [B9] |
577
|
Reproductive options of RET mutation carriers |
R17
|
|
| [B10] |
577
|
Possibility of inherited disease in RET mutation–negative MTC patients and families |
R18
|
|
| [B11] |
577
|
Preoperative testing of asymptomatic RET mutation–positive patients for MTC, PHPT, and PHEO |
R19–R26
|
|
| [B12] |
578
|
Sources of Ct assay interference |
R27
|
|
| [B13] |
579
|
Effects of age and sex on the normal Ct range |
R28–R31
|
|
| [B14] |
579
|
Surgery for the youngest MEN 2B patients |
R32–R33
|
|
| [B15] |
580
|
Surgery for the youngest MEN 2A or FMTC patients |
R34–R36
|
|
| [B16] |
580
|
Preoperative imaging and biochemical testing to evaluate for MTC in older RET mutation–positive patients |
R37
|
|
| [B17] |
580
|
Surgery for the older MEN 2B patients without evidence of cervical lymph node metastases and normal or minimally elevated Ct levels |
R39–R40
|
|
| [B18] |
581
|
Surgery for the older MEN 2A or FMTC patients without evidence of cervical lymph node metastases and normal or minimally elevated Ct levels |
R41–R42
|
|
| [B19] |
581
|
Diagnostic testing for RET mutation–positive patients suspected of having metastases based on imaging or serum Ct level |
R43
|
|
| [B20] |
581
|
Management of normal parathyroid glands resected or devascularized during surgery |
R44–R46
|
|
| [B21] |
581
|
Treatment of PHPT in MEN 2A |
R47–R50
|
|
| [C] |
582
|
Initial diagnosis and therapy of clinically apparent disease |
R52
|
|
| [C1] |
583
|
Preoperative laboratory testing for presumed MTC when an FNA or Ct level is diagnostic or suspicious for MTC |
R53
|
|
| [C2] |
583
|
Evaluation and treatment of PHEO |
R54–R57
|
|
| [C3] |
584
|
Preoperative imaging for presumed MTC when an FNA or Ct level is diagnostic or suspicious for MTC |
R58–R60
|
|
| [C4] |
584
|
Surgery for MTC patients without advanced local invasion or cervical node or distant metastases |
R61
|
|
| [C5] |
585
|
Surgery for MTC patients with limited local disease and limited or no distant metastases |
R62–R64
|
|
| [C6] |
585
|
Surgery for MTC patients with advanced local disease or extensive distant metastases |
R65–R66
|
|
| [C7] |
586
|
Thyrotropin suppression therapy in MTC |
R67
|
|
| [C8] |
586
|
Somatic RET testing in sporadic MTC |
R68
|
|
| [D] |
586
|
Initial evaluation and treatment of postoperative patients |
|
|
| [D1] |
586
|
Postoperative staging systems |
R69
|
|
| [D2] |
587
|
Completion thyroidectomy and lymph node dissection after hemithyroidectomy |
R70–R72
|
|
| [D3] |
588
|
Laboratory testing after resection of MTC |
R73
|
|
| [D4] |
588
|
Testing and treatment of patients with an undetectable postoperative basal serum Ct |
R74
|
|
| [D5] |
588
|
Testing and treatment of patients with a detectable, but modestly elevated postoperative basal serum Ct |
R75–R78
|
|
| [D6] |
590
|
Testing and treatment of patients with a significantly elevated postoperative basal serum Ct |
R79–R84
|
|
| [D7] |
591
|
Role of postoperative radioiodine ablation |
R85
|
|
| [D8] |
591
|
Role of empiric liver or lung biopsy, hepatic vein sampling, systemic vascular sampling, or hepatic angiography |
R86
|
|
| [E] |
591
|
Management of persistent or recurrent MTC |
|
|
| [E1] |
591
|
Goal of management of patients with metastatic MTC: choosing when metastases require treatment |
R87
|
|
| [E2] |
592
|
Management of patients with metastatic MTC: determining tumor burden and rate of progression using sequential imaging and tumor marker DTs |
R88–R89
|
|
| [E3] |
592
|
Management of Ct-positive, but imaging-negative patients |
R90–R91
|
|
| [E4] |
592
|
Adjunctive external beam irradiation to the neck |
R92–R95
|
|
| [E5] |
593
|
Brain metastases |
R96
|
|
| [E6] |
593
|
Bone metastases |
R97–R103
|
|
| [E7] |
594
|
Lung and mediastinal metastases |
R104
|
|
| [E8] |
594
|
Hepatic metastases |
R105
|
|
| [E9] |
594
|
Palliative surgery |
R106
|
|
| [E10] |
594
|
Chemotherapy and clinical trials |
R107–R109
|
|
| [E11] |
595
|
Symptoms, evaluation, and treatment of hormonally active metastases |
R110–R113
|
|
| [F] |
596
|
Long-term follow-up and management |
|
|
| [F1] |
596
|
Goals of long-term follow-up and management of patients with and without residual disease |
R114–R118
|
|
| [F2] |
596
|
Follow-up of patients without MTC at thyroidectomy |
R119
|
|
| [F3] |
597
|
Role of stimulation testing for serum Ct |
R120
|
|
| [F4] |
597
|
Management of CEA-positive, but Ct-negative patients |
R121
|
|
| [F5] |
597
|
Lichen planus amyloidosis |
R122
|
|
| [G] |
597
|
Directions for future research |
|
|
aIf viewing these guidelines on the Web, or in a File, copy the Location Key to the Find or Search Function to navigate rapidly to the desired section.
MTC, medullary thyroid carcinoma; R, recommendations; D, definitions; MEN, multiple endocrine neoplasia; FMTC, familial medullary thyroid carcinoma; Ct, calcitonin; PHPT, primary hyperparathyroidism; FNA, fine-needle aspiration; DT, doubling time; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen.
Table 2. Definitions Used for Medullary Thyroid
Cancer Management Guidelines
| ACTH | Adrenocorticotropic hormone |
| CEA | Carcinoembryonic antigen |
| CEA DT | Carcinoembryonic antigen doubling time |
| CLA | Cutaneous lichen amyloidosis |
| CRH | Corticotropin-releasing hormone |
| Ct | Calcitonin |
| Ct DT | Calcitonin doubling time |
| CT | Computed tomography |
| DT | Doubling time |
| DTPA | Diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid |
| EBRT | External beam radiation therapya |
| FMTC | Familial medullary thyroid cancer |
| FNA | Fine-needle aspiration |
| HSCR | Hirschsprung disease |
| MEN | Multiple endocrine neoplasia |
| MIBG | Metaiodobenzylguanidine |
| MRI | Magnetic resonance imaging |
| MTC | Medullary thyroid carcinoma |
| OS | Overall survival |
| PHEO | Pheochromocytoma |
| PHPT | Primary hyperparathyroidism |
| PTH | Parathyroid hormone |
| RAI | Radioactive iodine |
| US | Ultrasound |
aMay include intensity-modulated radiation therapy.
Administration
The ATA Executive Council selected a MTC Guidelines Task Force chairman using criteria that included MTC clinical experience and the absence of dogmatically held views in areas of recognized controversy. A Task Force was selected based on clinical expertise to include representation of endocrinology, genetics, pediatrics, nuclear medicine, surgery, oncology, and clinical laboratory testing. The Task Force additionally included experts from both North America and Europe, and all members disclosed potential conflicts of interest. Guidelines funding was derived solely from the general funds of the ATA and Thyroid Cancer Survivors’ Association, Inc. (ThyCa) through an unrestricted educational grant and were devoid of commercial support.
The Task Force considered how patients with MTC or a genetic predisposition for the disease are encountered, diagnosed, and treated. In this framework, a series of flow diagrams was created and revised, and a list of questions were developed and assigned to individual Task Force members to answer utilizing the published literature and expert opinion when relevant. Based on these documents a preliminary Guideline and a series of Recommendations were made and then critically reviewed and modified by the full Task Force. The level of evidence to support the Recommendations was categorized and reviewed. Finally, the full Task Force again critically reviewed the entire Guideline and Recommendations through several iterations and arrived at a document of consensus. In most cases the consensus was unanimous while in some cases there were disparate views held by a minority of panel members; the most significant of which are noted in this document. The final document is the product of face-to-face meetings in Phoenix, Arizona, October 12, 2006; Columbus, Ohio, November 11, 2006; and Toronto, Ontario, June 2, 2007; and multiple electronic communications and telephone conference calls. The final document was approved by the ATA Board of Directors, and officially endorsed (in alphabetical order) by: American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) Endocrine Surgery Committee, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), American Association of Endocrine Surgeons (AAES), American College of Endocrinology (ACE), Asia and Oceanic Thyroid Association (AOTA), British Association of Endocrine and Thyroid Surgeons (BAETS), British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists (BAHNO), Canadian Society of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery (CSOHNS), The Endocrine Society (ENDO), European Society of Endocrinology (ESE), European Society of Endocrine Surgery (ESES), European Thyroid Association (ETA), International Association of Endocrine Surgeons (IAES), Latin American Thyroid Society (LATS), and the Ukrainian Association of Endocrine Surgeons (UAES).
Literature review and evidence-based medicine
Relevant articles were identified by searching PubMed MEDLINE at Pubmed (NLM) using the following search terms: (medullary carcinoma) OR (medullary thyroid cancer) OR (medullary thyroid carcinoma) OR (RET) OR (calcitonin) which yielded 30,095 articles on March 10, 2007. Limiting the search to include ‘‘humans’’; and ‘‘randomized controlled trials’’ or ‘‘meta-analysis’’ from (medullary carcinoma) OR (medullary thyroid cancer) OR (medullary thyroid carcinoma) yielded 12 articles, of which 8 were relevant and they were reviewed in detail by the Task Force. In addition to these articles, numerous additional relevant articles, book chapters, and other materials were also supplied by Task Force members, including works published after the initial search. Published works were utilized to devise this Guideline as referenced.
The Task Force categorized our recommendations using criteria adapted from the United States Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (Table 3) as was used in the ATA publication Management Guidelines for Patients with Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer (5).
Table 3. Strength of Recommendations Based on Available Evidence
| Rating |
Definition
|
|
A |
Strongly recommends. The recommendation is based on good evidence that the service or intervention can improve important health outcomes. Evidence includes consistent results from well-designed, well-conducted studies in representative populations that directly assess effects on health outcomes. |
| B | Recommends. The recommendation is based on fair evidence that the service or intervention can improve important health outcomes. The evidence is sufficient to determine effects on health outcomes, but the strength of the evidence is limited by the number, quality, or consistency of the individual studies; generalizability to routine practice; or indirect nature of the evidence on health outcomes. |
| C | Recommends. The recommendation is based on expert opinion. |
| D | Recommends against. The recommendation is based on expert opinion. |
| E | Recommends against. The recommendation is based on fair evidence that the service or intervention does not improve important health outcomes or that harms outweigh benefits. |
| F | Strongly recommends against. The recommendation is based on good evidence that the service or intervention does not improve important health outcomes or that harms outweigh benefits. |
| I | Recommends neither for nor against. The panel concludes that the evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against providing the service or intervention because evidence is lacking that the service or intervention improves important health outcomes, the evidence is of poor quality, or the evidence is conflicting. As a result, the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. |
Adapted from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.