Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38049717›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2023

Threshold growth has a limited role in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from other focal hepatic lesions.

Rong Lyu, Di Wang, Weijuan Hu, Zhongsong Gao, Changlu Yu, Jiao Wang, Mingge Li, Kefeng Jia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Value of threshold growth for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using LI-RADS.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rong Lyu *Department of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Di Wang *Department of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Weijuan HuDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Zhongsong GaoDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Changlu YuDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Jiao WangDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Mingge LiDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China.
Kefeng JiaDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases, Artificial Cell Engineering Technology Research Center, Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease, NO.83 Jintang Road, Hedong District, Tianjin, 300170, China. wangzhiwangzhi2000@126.com.
Tianjin Medical University · CNTianjin Third Central Hospital · CN

Funding

This study was supported by the grants form Tianjin Key Medical Discipline (Specialty) Construction Project TJYXZDXK-074CTianjin Health Project of Science and Technology TJWJ2022XK027Tianjin Health Science and Technology Project TJWJ2022QN045
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThe role of threshold growth, as one of the major features (MFs) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is inconsistent. This study evaluated the LI-RADS diagnostic performance for HCC when threshold growth was removed or replaced by independently significant ancillary features (AFs). MATERIALS AND 

methodsThis retrospective institutional review board-approved study included patients with a high HCC risk who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRIs. The MRI findings were consistent with pathologically proven focal hepatic observations. The pathological results were used as the gold standard reference. The sizes of the lesions with and without threshold growth were compared. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to confirm the independently significant AFs of HCC. In addition to the classification criteria of LI-RADS version 2018 (LI-RADS v2018), the lesions were also reclassified according to the following two schemes: scheme A, using all MFs except threshold growth, with threshold growth feature treated as an AF favouring malignancy; and scheme B, replacing the threshold growth feature with independently significant AFs and treated them as new MFs. The diagnostic performance of the above two LI-RADS schemes for HCC was calculated and compared with that of LI-RADS v2018.

resultsA total of 379 patients and 426 observations were included. Threshold growth was not an independent significant MF for HCC diagnosis [odds ratio (OR), 1.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.6-1.8; p = 0.927]. For all three groups of observations (HCCs, non-HCC malignancies, and benign lesions), the mean size with threshold growth was smaller than that without threshold growth (all p < 0.05). The nodule-in-nodule feature was an independent significant AF (OR, 9.8; 95% CI, 1.2-79.3; p = 0.032) and was used to replace threshold growth as a new MF in scheme B. The sensitivities of schemes A and B were 74.0% and 75.6%, respectively. The specificities of schemes A and B were the same (88.6%). None of the diagnostic performance metrics for HCC (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) of either scheme A or B was significantly different from those of LI-RADS v2018 (all p > 0.05).

conclusionThreshold growth is not an independently significant MF for HCC diagnosis. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS for HCC is not affected regardless of whether threshold growth is removed from the list of MFs or replaced with an independently significant and more HCC-specific AF, which is the nodule-in-nodule feature.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsContrast MediaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaDiagnosisHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)LiverMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

Identifiers

PMID38049717
PMCPMC10694982
OpenAlexW4389300289

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.