ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2024
Enhancement Pattern Mapping for Early Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Cirrhosis.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing a fully automated imaging biomarker for HCC risk assessment via MRI-based tumor segmentation and EPM.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clinical Applications of Quantitative Imaging and Artificial Intelligence for Pancreatic Cance.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Aims: Limited methods exist to accurately characterize the risk of malignant progression of liver lesions. Enhancement pattern mapping (EPM) measures voxel-based root mean square deviation (RMSD) of parenchyma and the contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratio enhances in malignant lesions. This study investigates the utilization of EPM to differentiate between HCC versus cirrhotic parenchyma with and without benign lesions. Methods: Patients with cirrhosis undergoing MRI surveillance were studied prospectively. Cases (n=48) were defined as patients with LI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions who developed HCC during surveillance. Controls (n=99) were patients with and without LI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions who did not develop HCC. Manual and automated EPM signals of liver parenchyma between cases and controls were quantitatively validated on an independent patient set using cross validation with manual methods avoiding parenchyma with artifacts or blood vessels. Results: With manual EPM, RMSD of 0.37 was identified as a cutoff for distinguishing lesions that progress to HCC from background parenchyma with and without lesions on pre-diagnostic scans (median time interval 6.8 months) with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 (CI: 0.73-0.94) and a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.65, 0.97, and 0.89, respectively. At the time of diagnostic scans, a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.79, 0.93, and 0.88 were achieved with manual EPM with an AUC of 0.89 (CI: 0.82-0.96). EPM RMSD signals of background parenchyma that did not progress to HCC in cases and controls were similar (case EPM: 0.22 ± 0.08, control EPM: 0.22 ± 0.09, p=0.8). Automated EPM produced similar quantitative results and performance. Conclusion: With manual EPM, a cutoff of 0.37 identifies quantifiable differences between HCC cases and controls approximately six months prior to diagnosis of HCC with an accuracy of 89%.
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.