ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS Version 2018 for Primary Liver Cancer in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis on Enhanced MRI.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Performance of LI-RADS category 5 vs combined categories 4 and 5: a systemic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Pooled it
- MRI features and LI-RADS categorization of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: a scoping review with prognostic implications.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- AI-guided additive scoring model for differential diagnosis of primary liver cancer.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026Article
- A modified Rim APHE criterion to improve LI-RADS diagnostic performance for primary liver malignancies.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Value of intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion kurtosis imaging to differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Imaging and prognostic characterization of fat-containing hepatocellular carcinoma subtypes.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
- Differentiation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma from Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma through MRI Radiomics.Cancers · 2023Article
- Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The Diagnostic Approach towards Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma-State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The study evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from primary liver cancer in patients with liver cirrhosis based on the updated 2019 WHO classification. Materials and Methods: From 2016 to 2021, 300 patients with surgically confirmed primary liver cancer (PLC) and liver cirrhosis based on the updated 2019 WHO classification were eligible for this retrospective study (100 cases in each of three groups including HCC, ICC, and cHCC-CCA). Two radiologists were blinded to the final diagnosis and independently assigned an LI-RADS category to each liver nodule. The diagnostic performances of the LR-5 category (definitely HCC), and the LR-M category (probably or definitely malignant, but not specific for HCC) were calculated in overall and small observations (<20 mm). Comparisons between groups of categorical variables were performed by one-way analysis of variance and the Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test. Results: The mean age of 300 patients (226 men and 74 women) was 57.40 ± 11.05 years. The sensitivity and specificity of the LR-5 category for differentiating HCCs from other primary liver cancers were 81% (81 of 100) and 82% (164 of 200), respectively. The LR-M category had a sensitivity of 63% (126 of 200) for diagnosing non-HCCs (ICCs and cHCC-CCAs), with a specificity of 90% (90 of 100). The LR-5 category had a sensitivity of 82.5% (33 of 40) for diagnosing HCCs in small observations (<20 mm) with a specificity of 76.6% (59 of 77). On the contrary, LR-M demonstrated slightly higher specificity (93.8%) and sensitivity (73.8%) for diagnosing non-HCCs with tumor size <20 mm. Conclusion: The LR-5 category as well as the LR-M category of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 can effectively distinguish hepatocellular carcinoma from other primary hepatic malignancies in patients with liver cirrhosis, especially for small observations (<20 mm).
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.