Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30866850›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2019

Radiomics-based classification of hepatocellular carcinoma and hepatic haemangioma on precontrast magnetic resonance images.

Jingjun Wu, Ailian Liu, Jingjing Cui, Anliang Chen, Qingwei Song, Lizhi Xie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Preliminary study on the ability ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Current status and prospects for screening early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Jingjun WuDepartment of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University; Xigang district, Zhongshan road, No.222, Dalian, China.
Ailian LiuDepartment of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University; Xigang district, Zhongshan road, No.222, Dalian, China. cjr.liuailian@vip.163.com.
Jingjing CuiHuiying Medical Technology Co., Ltd, Beijing, China.
Anliang ChenDepartment of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University; Xigang district, Zhongshan road, No.222, Dalian, China.
Qingwei SongDepartment of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University; Xigang district, Zhongshan road, No.222, Dalian, China.
Lizhi XieGE Healthcare, MR Research, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the feasibility of using radiomics with precontrast magnetic resonance imaging for classifying hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hepatic haemangioma (HH).

methodsThis study enrolled 369 consecutive patients with 446 lesions (a total of 222 HCCs and 224 HHs). A training set was constituted by randomly selecting 80% of the samples and the remaining samples were used to test. On magnetic resonance (MR) images of HCC and HH obtained with in-phase, out-phase, T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequences, we outlined the target lesions and extracted 1029 radiomics features, which were classified as first-, second-, higher-order statistics and shape features. Then, the variance threshold, select k best, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithms were explored for dimensionality reduction of the features. We used four classifiers (decision tree, random forest, K nearest neighbours, and logistic regression) to identify HCC and HH on the basis of radiomics features. Two abdominal radiologists also performed the conventional qualitative analysis for classification of HCC and HH. Diagnostic performances of radiomics and radiologists were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

resultsValuable radiomics features for building a radiomics signature were extracted from in-phase (n = 22), out-phase (n = 24), T2WI (n = 34) and DWI (n = 24) sequences. In comparison, the logistic regression classifier showed better predictive ability by combining four sequences. In the training set, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.86 (sensitivity: 0.76; specificity: 0.78), and in the testing set, the AUC was 0.89 (sensitivity: 0.822; specificity: 0.714). The diagnostic performance for the optimal radiomics-based combined model was significantly higher than that for the less experienced radiologist (2-years experience) (AUC = 0.702, p < 0.05), and had no statistic difference with the experienced radiologist (10-years experience) (AUC = 0.908, p>0.05).

conclusionsWe developed and validated a radiomics signature as an adjunct tool to distinguish HCC and HH by combining in-phase, out-phase, T2W, and DW MR images, which outperformed the less experienced radiologist (2-years experience), and was nearly equal to the experienced radiologist (10-years experience).

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularContrast MediaDecision TreesDiagnosis, DifferentialFeasibility StudiesHemangiomaHumansLiver NeoplasmsLogistic ModelsMagnetic Resonance ImagingROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaClassificationHepatic haemangiomaHepatocellular carcinomaMagnetic resonance imagingRadiomics

Identifiers

PMID30866850
PMCPMC6417028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.