Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41831606›Full record

ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2026

PERSoN4: A multiparametric ultrasound model to improve CEUS LI-RADS for HCC.

Giorgio Esposto, Paolo Santini, Linda Galasso, Maria Elena Ainora, Alice Giamperoli, Lucia Cerrito, Raffaele Borriello, Irene Mignini, Matteo Garcovich, Mattia Paratore and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Giorgio EspostoCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Paolo SantiniThrombosis Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Linda GalassoCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Maria Elena AinoraCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Alice GiamperoliDivision of Internal Medicine, Hepatobiliary and Immunoallergic Diseases, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Italy.
Lucia CerritoCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Raffaele BorrielloCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Irene MigniniCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Matteo GarcovichCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Mattia ParatoreCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Laura RiccardiCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Maurizio PompiliCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Francesca Romana PonzianiCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Antonio GasbarriniCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Fabio PiscagliaDivision of Internal Medicine, Hepatobiliary and Immunoallergic Diseases, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Italy.
Maria Assunta ZoccoCEMAD Digestive Disease Center, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: mariaassunta.zocco@unicatt.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsDynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (D-CEUS) could be a valuable tool for the non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with atypical vascular imaging features.

methodsBetween January 2021 and November 2023, consecutive patients with chronic liver disease and liver nodules who were candidates for liver biopsy were enrolled in this cohort study. CEUS was performed in all patients before biopsy and categorized according to the CEUS Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). Clips were examined using VueBox® software. Clinical and ultrasound parameters were compared among the different histological entities, analyzed with univariable analysis, and incorporated into a logistic regression model for HCC diagnosis. The diagnostic accuracy of the identified model was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and relative AUC. The model was then tested on a validation cohort comprising consecutive patients from two centers.

resultsA total of 88 patients (57 with HCC, 17 with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 11 with liver metastases, and three with benign lesions) were enrolled. Statistically significant differences between patients with and without HCC in the training cohort were incorporated in an optimal logistic regression model that included the following predictive variables: sex, number of nodules ≥4, peripheral rim-like hyperenhancement, and peak enhancement (PE) ratio (PE-rim-like enhancement-Sex-Nodules≥4; PERSoN4). The model displayed high accuracy (AUC 0.91) for the diagnosis of HCC. In the validation cohort, the model showed a sensitivity of 48.8% and a specificity of 100.0%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 100.0%, maintaining good diagnostic accuracy (AUC of 0.74).

conclusionsPERSoN4 could improve the performance of CEUS LI-RADS criteria, possibly leading to a non-invasive diagnosis of HCC in nearly 50% of patients currently referred for liver biopsy. However, this model requires further external validation before entering clinical practice. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Accurate non-invasive diagnosis of HCC remains challenging in patients with atypical vascular patterns on CEUS, providing the scientific rationale for developing a multiparametric D-CEUS-based risk model that integrates quantitative perfusion analysis with clinical and imaging features. Our findings suggest that the PERSoN4 model could meaningfully enhance the diagnostic performance of CEUS LI-RADS, particularly by identifying a subset of patients in whom HCC can be diagnosed with very high specificity and PPV, which is relevant for hepatologists, radiologists, and multidisciplinary tumor boards managing indeterminate nodules. This approach could reduce the need for liver biopsy in nearly half of currently eligible patients, streamlining diagnostic pathways and potentially lowering procedure-related risks and costs. However, given the moderate sensitivity and the limited sample size, further large-scale external validation is essential before widespread clinical implementation.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsAgedBiopsyCohort StudiesContrast MediaFemaleHumansLiverLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyContrast MediaCEUS LI-RADSDCE-USHCC

Identifiers

PMID41831606
PMCPMC13158406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.