ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2026
Modified clear cell likelihood score and a new CAT score in the assessment of indeterminate small renal masses.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn recent decades, small renal masses (SRMs) have become common incidental findings in cross-sectional studies; however, a widely implemented approach for the characterization of SRMs is still lacking. Thus, in this study, we aimed to explore the diagnostic performance of existing algorithms and to propose - as a conceptual framework rather than a clinically verified tool - a new simple radiological scale for estimating the probability of malignancy in SRMs.
methodsPatients with indeterminate solid SRMs (N = 50), discovered using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) between 2012 and 2023 were included. In 38 cases, the final diagnosis was based on histopathology, while in 12 cases it relied on regression or lack of progression during follow-up. Modified versions of the clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) were calculated, and its diagnostic performance was assessed. Moreover, we analyzed the newly created score, which consisted of selected MRI and clinical features. All of our modified scales used a Likert score for the likelihood of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).
resultsBased on the results of our statistical analyses, we modified the ccLS by adding T1 SI ratio < 0.73, arterial to delayed ratio (ADER) > 0.99, and smoking as independent predictors of ccRCC. We created a new scale, the CAT score, which combined hyperintensity in the Corticomedullary phase, ADER > 0.99, and TI SI ratio < 0.73 (with 1 point being assigned to each of the above-mentioned MRI parameters). In our results, the best diagnostic accuracy was observed for a CAT score ≥ 2, with a sensitivity of 73.9% (51.6-89.8%), a specificity of 77.8% (57.7-91.4%), and an accuracy of 76.0% (61.8-86.9%). Univariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that all scales created by our group were significant predictors of ccRCC. Importantly, they showed a better predictive ability than the standard ccLS score.
conclusionsThe CAT score appears to improve the prediction of ccRCC compared with both standard and modified versions of the ccLS and may serve as a potential aid in the routine assessment of indeterminate SRMs. Nonetheless, this study should be regarded as a preliminary, proof-of-concept analysis rather than a definitive model-development study. The main limitation of our study is its small, single-center cohort, which limits the statistical power and robustness of model development. Moreover, a substantial proportion of benign diagnoses based only on radiological follow-up rather than histopathology. Therefore, before clinical implementation, the CAT score requires prospective validation in larger, independent, multicenter cohorts.
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.