Our previous paradigm assigned the same magnitude of risk for all patients with N1 disease. However, small-volume subclinical microscopic N1 disease clearly conveys a much smaller risk of recurrence than large-volume, macroscopic clinically apparent loco-regional metastases. Armed with this information, clinicians will be better able to tailor initial treatment and follow-up recommendations. Implications of N1 stratification for PTC into small-volume microscopic disease versus clinically apparent macroscopic disease importantly relate to issues of prophylactic neck dissection utility, need for pathologic nodal size description, and suggest potential modifications to the AJCC TNM (tumor, nodal disease, and distant metastasis) and ATA risk recurrence staging systems.

We demonstrate significant predictive performance of the risk model in a new cohort of patients with primary HNSCC, adjusted for confounders. Our training experience also supports the feasibility of adapting the risk model in clinical practice.

The Risk Model is a validated outcome predictor for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (Brandwein-Gensler et al. in Am J Surg Pathol 20:167-178, 2005; Am J Surg Pathol 34:676-688, 2010 Head and Neck Pathol (2013) 7:211-223 DOI 10.1007/s12105-012-0412-1 in 9 T1N0 patients (6 %) and 9 T2N0 patients (10 %). On multivariable analysis, the Risk Model was significantly predictive of LRR (p = 0.0012, HR 2.41, 95 % CI 1.42, 4.11) and DSS (p = 0.0005, HR 9.16, 95 % CI 2.65, 31.66) adjusted for potential confounders. WPOI alone was also significantly predictive for LRR adjusted for potential confounders with a cut-point of either WPOI-4 (p = 0.0029, HR 3.63, 95 % CI 1.56, 8.47) or WPOI-5 (p = 0.0008, HR 2.55, 95 % CI 1.48, 4.41) and for DSS (cut point WPOI-5, p = 0.0001, HR 6.34, 95 % CI 2.50, 16.09). Given a WPOI-5, the probability of developing locoregional recurrence is 42 %. Given a high-risk classification for a combination of features other than WPOI-5, the probability of developing locoregional recurrence is 32 %. The Risk Model is the first validated model that is significantly predictive for the important niche group of low-stage OCSCC patients.

Objective To examine genotypic and clinical differences between encapsulated, non-encapsulated and diffuse follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma (EFVPTC, NFVPTC, diffuse FVPTC), in order to characterize the entities and identify predictors of their behavior. Design Retrospective chart review and molecular analysis. Setting Referral center of a university hospital. Patients The pathology of 484 consecutive patients with differentiated thyroid cancer who underwent surgery by the 3 members of the NYU Endocrine Surgery Associates from January 1, 2007 to August 1, 2010 was reviewed. Forty-five patients with FVPTC and in whom at least 1 central compartment lymph node was removed were included. Main Outcome Measures Patients with FVPTC were compared in terms of age, gender, tumor size, encapsulation, extrathyroid extension, vascular invasion, central nodal metastases, and the presence or absence of mutations in BRAF, H-RAS 12/13, K-RAS 12/13, N-RAS 12/13, H-RAS 61, K-RAS 61, N-RAS 61 and RET/PTC1. Results No patient with EFVPTC had central lymph node metastasis and in this group, 1 patient (4.5%) had a BRAFV600E mutation and 2 patients (9%) had RAS mutations. Of the patients with NFVPTC, 0 had central lymph node metastasis (p=1) and 2 (11%) had a BRAFV600E mutation (p=0.59). Of the patients with diffuse FVPTC, all had central lymph node metastasis (p=0.0001) and 2 (50%) had a BRAFV600E mutation (p=0.12). Conclusions FVPTC consists of several distinct subtypes. Diffuse FVPTC seems to present and behave in a more aggressive fashion. It has a higher rate of central nodal metastasis and BRAFV600E mutation in comparison to EFVPTC and NFVPTC. Both EFVPTC and NFVPTC behave in a similar fashion. The diffuse infiltrative pattern and not just presence/absence of encapsulation seems to determine the tumor phenotype. Understanding the different subtypes of FVPTC will help guide appropriate treatment strategies.

Identification of recurrent/persistent disease requires a team decision-making process that includes the patient and physicians as to what, if any, intervention should be performed to best control the disease while minimizing morbidity. Several management principles and variables involved in the decision making for surgery versus active surveillance were developed that should be taken into account when deciding how best to manage a patient with DTC and suspected recurrent or persistent cervical nodal disease.