Secondary tumours to the thyroid gland are uncommon and often incidentally discovered on imaging. Symptomatic patients often present with a neck mass. Collision tumours of secondary tumours and primary thyroid neoplasms do occur. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration, core-needle biopsy, and surgical resection with histological and immunohistochemical analysis are employed to confirm diagnosis as well as for applying molecular studies to identify candidates for targeted therapy. Biopsy at the metastatic site can identify mutations (such as EGFR, K-Ras, VHL) and translocations (such as EML4-ALK fusion) important in planning target therapies. Patients with advanced-stage primary cancers, widespread dissemination, or unknown primary origin often have a poor prognosis. Those with isolated metastasis to the thyroid have better survival outcomes and are more likely to undergo thyroid resection. Systemic therapies, such as chemotherapy and hormonal therapy, are often used as adjuvant treatment post-operatively or in patients with disseminated disease. New targeted therapies, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, have shown success in reported cases. A tailored treatment plan based on primary tumour features, overall cancer burden, and co-morbidities is imperative. To conclude, secondary cancer to the thyroid is uncommon, and awareness of the updates on diagnosis and management is needed.

Background and purpose Although fundoscopy is a crucial part of the neurological examination, it is challenging, under‐utilized and unreliably performed. The aim was to determine the prevalence of fundus pathology amongst neurology inpatients and the diagnostic accuracy of current fundoscopy practice compared with systematic screening with smartphone fundoscopy (SF) and portable non‐mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP). Methods This was a prospective cross‐sectional surveillance and diagnostic accuracy study on adult patients admitted under neurology in an Australian hospital. Inpatients were randomized to initial NMFP (RetinaVue 100, Welch Allyn) or SF (D‐EYE) followed by a crossover to the alternative modality. Images were graded by neurology doctors, using telemedicine consensus neuro‐ophthalmology NMFP grading as the reference standard. Feasibility parameters included ease, comfort and speed. Results Of 79 enrolled patients, 14.1% had neurologically relevant pathology (seven, disc pallor; one, hypertensive retinopathy; three, disc swelling). The neurology team performed direct ophthalmoscopy in 6.6% of cases and missed all abnormalities. SF had a sensitivity of 30%–40% compared with NMFP (45.5%); however, it had a lower rate of screening failure (1% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), a shorter examination time (1.10 vs. 2.25 min, p < 0.001) and a slightly higher patient comfort rating (9.2 vs. 8/10, p < 0.001). Conclusion Our study demonstrates a clinically significant prevalence of fundus pathology amongst neurology inpatients which was missed by current fundoscopy practices. Portable NMFP screening appears more accurate than SF, whilst both are diagnostically superior to routine fundoscopic practice, feasible and well tolerated by patients.

No abstract

No abstract