ArticleEuropean radiology2018
Inter-operator variability and source of errors in tumour response assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib.
Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Response evaluation to systemic therapy in HCC: Current challenges and future perspectives.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Review
- Assessing the reliability of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST): a systematic review of the factors contributing to inter-observer variability.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Biomedicine: A Systematic Review from Nanomedicine to Neurology and Hepatology.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Validation of the Toronto recurrence inference using machine-learning for post-transplant hepatocellular carcinoma model.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Tumour measurements on imaging for clinical trial: A national picture of service provision.BJC reports · 2025Review
- RECIST 1.1 assessments variability: a systematic pictorial review of blinded double reads.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Can blood-based markers predict RECIST progression in non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy?Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Reproducing RECIST lesion selection via machine learning: Insights into intra and inter-radiologist variation.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Impact of Pre-Liver Transplant Treatments on the Imaging Accuracy of HCC Staging and Their Influence on Outcomes.Cancers · 2024Article
- The Effectiveness of an Adaptive Method to Analyse the Transition between Tumour and Peritumour for Answering Two Clinical Questions in Cancer Imaging.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the capability and reproducibility of RECIST 1.1. measurements by technologists in breast cancer follow-up: a pilot study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Preliminary outcomes of DEB-TACE loaded with raltitrexed in the treatment of unresectable or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Article
- Article
- State-of-the-art review on the correlations between pathological and magnetic resonance features of cirrhotic nodules.Histology and histopathology · 2022Review
- Overall survival and toxicity of Y90 radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma patients in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C (BCLC-C).BMC gastroenterology · 2022Observational
- The prognostic role of early tumor shrinkage in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing immunotherapy.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Article
- Recurrence Outcome in Hepatocellular Carcinoma within Milan Criteria Undergoing Microwave Ablation with or without Transarterial Chemoembolization.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- The Feasibility of Liver Biopsy for Undefined Nodules in Patients under Surveillance for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Is Biopsy Really a Useful Tool?Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Pretreatment Modified Albumin-Bilirubin Grade Is an Important Predictive Factor Associated with the Therapeutic Response and the Continuation of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab Combination Therapy for Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the inter-operator concordance and the potential sources of discordance in defining response to sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsAll patients who received sorafenib between September 2008 and February 2015 were scrutinised for this retrospective study. Images were evaluated separately by three radiologists with different expertise in liver imaging (operator 1, >10 years; operator 2, 5 years; operator 3, no specific training in liver imaging), according to: response evaluation radiological criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) 1.1, modified RECIST (mRECIST) and response evaluation criteria in cancer of the liver (RECICL).
resultsThe overall response concordance between the more expert operators was good, irrespective of the criteria (RECIST 1.1, ĸ = 0.840; mRECIST, ĸ = 0.871; RECICL, ĸ = 0.819). Concordance between the less expert operator and the other colleagues was lower. The most evident discordance was in target lesion response assessment, with expert operators disagreeing mostly on lesion selection and less expert operators on lesion measurement. As a clinical correlate, overall survival was more tightly related with "progressive disease" as assessed by the expert compared to the same assessment performed by operator 3.
conclusionsDecision on whether a patient is a responder or progressor under sorafenib may vary among different operators, especially in case of a non-specifically trained radiologist. Regardless of the adopted criteria, patients should be evaluated by experienced radiologists to minimise variability in this critical instance. KEY POINTS: • Inter-operator variability in the assessment of response to sorafenib is poorly known. • The concordance between operators with expertise in liver imaging was good. • Target lesions selection was the main source of discordance between expert operators. • Concordance with non-specifically trained operator was lower, independently from the response criteria. • The non-specifically trained operator was mainly discordant in measurements of target lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.