ArticleEuropean radiology2024
Proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas in cirrhosis: patient outcomes of LI-RADS category 4/5 and category M.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond Diagnosis: Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Imaging Biomarkers for Tumor Biology, Prognosis, and Clinical Decision-Making in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Concurrent AI assistance with LI-RADS classification for contrast enhanced MRI of focal hepatic nodules: a multi-reader, multi-case study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- LR-M for CT/MRI on LI-RADS v2018: a review of imaging criteria, performance, challenges and future directions from an end-user perspective.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Prognostic Significance of Intraindividual CT and MRI LI-RADS Agreement and Discordance in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- The value of using deep learning to predict proliferative hepatocellular carcinoma based on multiphasic magnetic resonance imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Radiomic features at contrast-enhanced CT predict proliferative hepatocellular carcinoma and its prognosis after transarterial chemoembolization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Integrating CEUS Imaging Features and LI-RADS Classification for Postoperative Early Recurrence Prediction in Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Machine Learning-Based Prognostic Approach.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
- LI-RADS: Current Status and Future Directions.Korean journal of radiology · 2024Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to compare Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) category 4/5 and category M (LR-M) of proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in cirrhotic patients and evaluate their impacts on prognosis.
methodsThis retrospective multi-reader study included cirrhotic patients with single treatment-naïve HCC ≤ 5.0 cm who underwent contrast-enhanced CT, MRI, and subsequent hepatic resection within 2 months. The percentages of CT/MRI LR-4/5 and LR-M in proliferative and non-proliferative HCCs were compared. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to assess the association of LI-RADS categories (LR-4/5 vs. LR-M) and pathologic classification (proliferative vs. non-proliferative) with overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Subgroups of patients with proliferative and non-proliferative HCCs were analyzed to compare OS and RFS between LR-4/5 and LR-M.
resultsOf the 204 included patients, 38 were classified as having proliferative HCC. The percentages of LR-M were higher in proliferative than non-proliferative HCC on both CT (15.8% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.007) and MRI (26.3% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.016). Independent of pathologic classification, CT and MRI LR-M were significantly associated with poorer OS (hazard ratio (HR) = 4.58, p = 0.013, and HR = 6.45, p < 0.001) and RFS (HR = 3.66, p = 0.005, and HR = 6.44, p < 0.001) than LR-4/5. MRI LR-M was associated with significantly poorer OS (p ≤ 0.003) and RFS (p < 0.001) than MRI LR-4/5 in both proliferative and non-proliferative HCCs.
conclusionsThis multi-reader study showed that the percentages of LR-M were significantly higher in proliferative than non-proliferative HCCs. CT/MRI LR-M was significantly associated with poor OS and RFS, independent of the pathologic classification of proliferative versus non-proliferative HCCs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: CT and MRI LI-RADS category M can be clinically useful in predicting poor outcomes in patients with proliferative and non-proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas. KEY POINTS: • The percentages of LR-M tumors on both CT and MRI were significantly higher in proliferative than non-proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas. • Independent of pathologic classification, CT/MRI LR-M categories were correlated with poor overall survival and recurrence-free survival. • Patients with both proliferative and non-proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas categorized as MRI LR-M had significantly poorer overall survival and recurrence-free survival than those categorized as MRI LR-4/5.
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.