ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Can multiparametric MRI clear cell likelihood scores differentiate fat-Poor AML from CcRCC in subcentimeter lesions?
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. 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.
- Combined radiological approach for characterization of solid renal masses: a proposed strategy for integrating the RENAL nephrometry score into the clear cell likelihood score.BMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Renal CT algorithm for evaluating clear cell carcinoma in solid renal masses ≤ 4 cm: a retrospective chinese two-center validation study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the potential of multiparametric MRI clear cell likelihood scores (ccLS) for differentiating between fat-poor angiomyolipoma (AML) and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) in subcentimeter Lesions (1 cm or smaller). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included consecutive patients with subcentimeter renal masses who underwent multiparametric MRI between September 2009 and September 2022 across three hospitals. Clinical and MRI findings were analyzed to differentiate between fat-poor AML and ccRCC. Lesions were categorized using the ccLS and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to assess ccLS performance.
resultsThirty-eight patients (mean age: 52 years ± 12; 19 women) with 39 lesions were included. Of the 39 lesions [mean size: 9.1 mm ± 1.0 (range, 6.0-10.0 mm)], 20 (51%) were ccRCC and 19 (49%) were fat-poor AML. Compared to the ccRCC, subcentimeter fat-poor AMLs were more likely to show hypointensity on T2WI (P < 0.001), homogeneous enhancement (P = 0.010), the presence of microscopic fat (P = 0.036), and the absence of a pseudocapsule (P = 0.020). The diagnostic percentage of fat-poor AML was 47% for a ccLS of 1 or 2, and ccRCC accounted for 75% in the ccLS 4 or 5 category. The AUC for discrimination was 0.846 (95% CI: 0.695-0.941, P < 0.001), with a sensitivity of 75.00% (95% CI: 50.9-91.3) and a specificity of 89.47% (95% CI: 66.9-98.7).
conclusionMultiparametric MRI clear cell likelihood scores can potentially be used to differentiate between fat-poor AML and ccRCC in lesions 1 cm or smaller.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39907721What 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.