Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30655882›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2019

Comparison of values of CT and MRI imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors.

Guibin Wang, Shicai Zhu, Xiukui Li

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05687747 (Single Centre Prospective Evaluation of 68Gallium-FAPI PET/MRI in Hepatocellular Carcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05687747 phase1recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Single Centre Prospective Evaluation of 68Gallium-FAPI PET/MRI in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational University Hospital, SingaporeRan2023 to 2026Enrolled100ConditionsHepatocellular CarcinomaArmsRadiolabelled tracer, 68Gallium-FAPI-46 PET/MRI
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Deep Learning Framework for Liver Segmentation fromSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Guibin WangDepartment of Imaging, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276003, P.R. China.
Shicai ZhuDepartment of Imaging, Linyi Thoracic Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276002, P.R. China.
Xiukui LiDepartment of Imaging, Linyi Cancer Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276001, P.R. China.
Linyi People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Value of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and in analysis of the prognostic factors of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHC) were compared. A total of 300 patients with PHC were selected from January 2013 to January 2016. Among them, 170 patients were diagnosed with small HCC. Patients were diagnosed by MRI and CT scans, respectively, and diagnostic efficacy of the methods was compared. A single factor and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were performed on 300 patients. The sensitivity of MRI screening was 78.82%, specificity was 78.46%, accuracy was 78.67%, positive predictive value was 82.72%, and negative predictive value was 73.91%. CT screening showed a sensitivity of 62.35%, a specificity of 73.85%, an accuracy of 67.33%, a positive predictive value of 75.71%, and a negative predictive value of 60.00%. Differences in sensitivity, accuracy, and negative predictive value between MRI and CT screening were statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between two groups in specificity and positive predictive value (P>0.05). Diagnostic efficiency of MRI is better than that of CT diagnosis. Univariate analysis showed that age, hepatitis B cirrhosis background, tumor stage, and portal vein embolization were prognostic factors for PHC. Cox multivariate regression analysis showed that the background of liver cirrhosis, tumor stage, and portal thrombosis were independent risk factors for poor prognosis for PHC patient and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). MRI is superior to CT in the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the diagnosis of small HCC. Individualized comprehensive treatment plans based on the patient's condition may be effective in prolonging the patient's survival time. Imaging diagnosis can provide survival basis for patients, improve diagnostic accuracy, and help to improve the survival rate.

Indexed as

CTdiagnostic valueMRIprimary hepatocellular carcinomaprognosissmall hepatocellular carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID30655882
PMCPMC6312947
OpenAlexW2900559135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.