Deciphering nodal burden in thyroid carcinoma: A dedicated survey of age, lymph node ratio, log odds of positive nodes, and preoperative prediction models

Abstract

Evidence regarding the prognosis of thyroid carcinoma is heterogeneous, ranging from age effects and nodal burden metrics, such as lymph node ratio (LNR) and log odds of positive nodes (LODDS), to preoperative imaging models comprising ultrasound, CEUS, and radiomics. We conducted a systematic review in line with PRISMA 2020 and SWiM, tabulated under four domains: age relative to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC-8) staging system, LNR and LODDS, and preoperative prediction models. Terminology and units were standardized through dual data extraction and Python-based harmonization. Prognostic studies were evaluated by Quality in Prognosis Studies, and prediction models were assessed using PROBAST. The AJCC-8 55-year threshold remains pragmatically useful, yet continuous nonlinear modeling of age offers better support for individualized risk estimates. Supplementing anatomic N staging with LNR significantly enhances prognostication, with compartment-specific ratios refining the N1 subgroup. LODDS should be coreported with LNR because it is less sensitive to lymph-node yield, preserves information at extreme values, and often equals or outperforms LNR. Preoperative radiomics and nomograms are promising but often lack external validation and adequate calibration, limiting clinical readiness. Common limitations include endpoint heterogeneity, variable follow-up, node-yield dependency, and sparse reporting of calibration or decision-curve analysis. Residual confounding in retrospective cohorts and reporting bias remain significant challenges.

Keywords

age / log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS) / lymph node ratio (LNR) / nodal burden / systematic review (PRISMA 2020; SWiM) / thyroid carcinoma

References

[1] Hu J, Yuan IJ, Mirshahidi S, Simental A, Lee SC, Yuan X. Thyroid carcinoma: phenotypic features, underlying biology and potential relevance for targeting therapy. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(4):1950. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041950

[2] Zhang J, Jia G, Su Y, et al. Prediction of cervical lymph nodes metastasis in papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) using nodal staging score (NSS). J Oncol. 2022;2022:9351911-9351917. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9351911

[3] Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, Byrd DR, eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. Springer; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3

[4] Schneider DF, Mazeh H, Chen H, Sippel RS. Lymph node ratio predicts recurrence in papillary thyroid cancer. Oncologist. 2013;18(2):157-162. https://doi.org/10.1634/THEONCOLOGIST.2012-0240

[5] Cao ZX, Weng X, Huang JS, Long X. Prognostic value of LODDS in medullary thyroid carcinoma based on competing risk model and propensity score matching analysis. Updates Surg. 2022;74(5):1551-1562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-022-01320-7

[6] Jing S, Song J, Di Y, Xiao J, Ma J, Wu Z. Construction and validation of novel nomograms based on the log odds of positive lymph nodes to predict the prognosis of papillary thyroid cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Front Endocrinol. 2025;16:1411426. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2025.1411426

[7] Hu Y, Wang Z, Dong L, Zhang L, Xiuyang L. The prognostic value of lymph node ratio for thyroid cancer: a meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2024;14:1333094. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1333094

[8] Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, et al. 2015 American thyroid association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American thyroid association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26(1):1-133. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0020

[9] Kim HI, Hyeon J, Park SY, et al. Impact of extranodal extension on risk stratification in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Thyroid. 2019;29(7):963-970. https://doi.org/10.1089/THY.2018.0541

[10] Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372(Mar):n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.N71

[11] Campbell M, McKenzie JE, Sowden A, et al. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline. BMJ. 2020;368(Jan):l6890. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.L6890

[12] Baethge C, Goldbeck-Wood S, Mertens S. SANRA—a scale for the quality assessment of narrative review articles. Research Integrity and Peer Review. 2019;4(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0064-8

[13] Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, Côté P, Bombardier C. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(4):280-286. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009

[14] Wolff RF, Moons KG, Riley RD, et al. PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(1):51-58. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-1376

[15] Nixon IJ, Kuk D, Wreesmann V, et al. Defining a valid age cutoff in staging of well-differentiated thyroid cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(2):410-415. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4762-2

[16] Nixon IJ, Wang LY, Migliacci JC, et al. An international multi-institutional validation of age 55 years as a cutoff for risk stratification in the AJCC/UICC staging system for well-differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26(3):373-380. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0315

[17] Van Velsen EFS, Visser WE, Stegenga MT, et al. Finding the optimal age cutoff for the UICC/AJCC TNM staging system in patients with papillary or follicular thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2021;31(7):1041-1049. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2020.0615

[18] Peng H, Zheng M, Li JY, Jin Z. Analysis of the ideal cutoff age as a predictor of differentiated thyroid cancer using the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Transl Cancer Res. 2024;13(8):4278-4289. https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-24-247

[19] Ylli D, Burman KD, Van Nostrand D, Wartofsky L. Eliminating the age cutoff in staging of differentiated thyroid cancer: the safest road? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(5):1813-1817. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2017-02725

[20] Thewjitcharoen Y, Chatchomchuan W, Karndumri K, et al. Impacts of the American joint committee on cancer (AJCC) 8th edition tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system on outcomes of differentiated thyroid cancer in Thai patients. Heliyon. 2021;7(3):e06624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06624

[21] Zhang K, Wang X, Wei T, Li Z, Zhu J, Chen YW. Well-defined survival outcome disparity across age cutoffs at 45 and 60 for medullary thyroid carcinoma: a long-term retrospective cohort study of 3601 patients. Front Endocrinol. 2024;15(June):1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2024.1393904

[22] Parvathareddy SK, Siraj AK, Qadri Z, et al. Lymph node ratio is superior to AJCC N stage for predicting recurrence in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Endocrine Connections. 2022;11(2). https://doi.org/10.1530/EC-21-0518

[23] Lee J, Lee SG, Kim K, et al. Clinical value of lymph node ratio integration with the 8th edition of the UICC TNM classification and 2015 ATA risk stratification systems for recurrence prediction in papillary thyroid cancer. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50069-4

[24] Kang IK, Kim K, Park J, Bae JS, Kim JS. Central lymph node ratio predicts recurrence in patients with N1b papillary thyroid carcinoma. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(15):3677. https://doi.org/10.3390/CANCERS14153677

[25] Luo Z, Hei H, Qin J, Zheng C, Gong W, Zhou B. Lymph node ratio as a tool to stratify patients with N1b papillary thyroid cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023;408(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03033-w

[26] Ma T, Cui J, Shi P, et al. Assessing the role of central lymph node ratio in predicting recurrence in N1a low-to-intermediate risk papillary thyroid carcinoma. Front Endocrinol. 2023;14(September):1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1158826

[27] Qiu C, Wu S, Li J. Central lymph node ratio is an important recurrence prognostic factor for pediatric differentiated thyroid cancer. Front Endocrinol. 2024;15(July):1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2024.1290617

[28] Prinzi A, Frasca F, Russo M, Le Moli R, Belfiore A, Malandrino P. Lymph node ratio as a predictive factor of persistent/recurrent disease in patients with medullary thyroid cancer: a single-center retrospective study. Endocr Pract. 2024;30(3):194-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eprac.2023.11.009

[29] Tang J, Jiang S, Gao L, et al. Construction and validation of a nomogram based on the log odds of positive lymph nodes to predict the prognosis of medullary thyroid carcinoma after surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(8):4360-4370. https://doi.org/10.1245/S10434-020-09567-3

[30] Prassas D, Kounnamas A, Cupisti K, Schott M, Knoefel WT, Krieg A. Prognostic performance of alternative lymph node classification systems for patients with medullary thyroid cancer: a single center cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29(4):2561-2569. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-11134-3

[31] Gobut H. LODDS and other prognostic factors in medullary thyroid cancers, single center experience. Eurasian Journal of Medical Investigation. 2023;7(3):251-258. https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmi.2023.31948

[32] Yan X, Peng Q, Chen J, et al. A nomogram based on conventional and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for predicting high-volume central lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2025;25(1):251. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-15023-w

[33] Zhang M, Zhang S, Wang Y, et al. Prediction of contralateral central lymph node metastasis in unilateral papillary thyroid carcinoma based on radiomics. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-04588-y

[34] Yu K, Wu X, Zhang W. Development and validation of a novel nomogram for predicting lateral lymph node metastasis in medullary thyroid carcinoma. Front Endocrinol. 2025;16(September):1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2025.1648529

[35] Garo ML, Deandreis D, Campennì A, Vrachimis A, Ovcaricek PP, Giovanella L. Accuracy of papillary thyroid cancer prognostic nomograms: a systematic review. Endocrine Connections. 2023;12(4). https://doi.org/10.1530/EC-22-0457

[36] Lambin P, Leijenaar RT, Deist TM, et al. Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2017;14(12):749-762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141

[37] Mongan J, Moy L, Kahn CE. Checklist for artificial intelligence in medical imaging (CLAIM): a guide for authors and reviewers. Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. 2020;2(2):e200029. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.2020200029

[38] Zwanenburg A, Vallières M, Abdalah MA, et al. The image biomarker standardization initiative: standardized quantitative radiomics for high-throughput image-based phenotyping. Radiology. 2020;295(2):328-338. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020191145

[39] Collins GS, Moons KGM, Dhiman P, et al. TRIPOD+AI statement: updated guidance for reporting clinical prediction models that use regression or machine learning methods. BMJ. 2024;385:e078378. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-078378

[40] Moons KGM, Damen JAA, Kaul T, et al. PROBAST+AI: an updated quality, risk of bias, and applicability assessment tool for prediction models using regression or artificial intelligence methods. BMJ. 2025;388:e082505. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-082505

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2026 The Author(s). Journal of Intelligent Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Tianjin University.