ArticleEuropean radiology2024
LI-RADS threshold growth based on tumor growth rate can improve the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3.0 cm.
Article in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- LI-RADS for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma by contrast-enhanced US with SonoVue and Sonazoid-a single center prospective study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Liver Tumor Segmentation Based on Multi-Scale Deformable Feature Fusion and Global Context Awareness.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Based on Gadolinium Ethoxybenzyl DTPA-Enhanced MRI: Diagnostic Performance of the Category-Modified LR-5 Criteria in Patients At Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDespite the revision of threshold growth (TG) in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018, the appropriate time period between the two examinations for TG has not been determined. We compared the accuracy of LI-RADS with TG based on tumor growth rate for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with that of LI-RADS v2018 based on the original TG.
methodsPatients who underwent preoperative MRI for focal solid lesions (≤ 3.0 cm) were retrospectively evaluated. Three readers measured the size of each lesion on prior CT/MRI and index MRI, with tumor growth rate defined as the percent change in lesion size per month. In addition to the original TG (≥ 50% size increase within ≤ 6 months), the modified TG based on tumor growth rates ≥ 10%/month (TG-10%), ≥ 20%/month (TG-20%), and ≥ 30%/month (TG-30%) were evaluated. The accuracies of these evaluation methods for LI-RADS category 5 HCC were compared using generalized estimation equations.
resultsA total of 508 lesions from 370 patients were evaluated. Compared with LI-RADS v2018 with the original TG, the accuracy of LI-RADS with TG-10% was significantly higher (85.0% vs. 80.7%, p < .001), whereas the accuracies of LI-RADS with TG-20% (81.3% vs. 80.7%, p = .404) and TG-30% (79.3% vs. 80.7%, p = .052) were not significant. The sensitivity of LI-RADS with TG-10% was higher than that of LI-RADS v2018 (79.0% vs. 72.5%, p < .001), whereas their specificities were not significantly different (96.6% vs. 96.6%, p > .999).
conclusionTG-10% improved the sensitivity of LI-RADS by detecting additional hepatocellular carcinomas underestimated due to short-term follow-up. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Threshold growth based on tumor growth rate can be clinically useful in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, by improving the sensitivity of LI-RADS. KEY POINTS: • The diagnostic accuracy of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 was not significantly affected by the time interval between prior and index assessments of threshold growth. • In the 334 hepatocellular carcinomas, the frequency of threshold growth was significantly higher using tumor growth rate ≥ 10%/month (TG-10%) than original threshold growth (53.3% vs. 18.0%, p < .001). • Compared with LI-RADS v2018 with the original threshold growth, LI-RADS with TG-10% had significantly higher accuracy (85.0% vs. 80.7%, p < .001) and sensitivity (79.0% vs. 72.5%, p < .001) but a similar specificity (96.6% vs. 96.6%, p > .999).
Indexed as
Identifiers
37589898What 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.