MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321993359 · doi:10.1097/ruq.0b013e318239422e

Differentiation of Benign From Malignant Liver Masses With Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse Technique

2011· article· en· W2321993359 on OpenAlex
Hojun Yu, Stephanie R. Wilson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImpulse (physics)Acoustic radiation forceRadiationRadiologyPathologyOpticsUltrasoundClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine the performance of Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) imaging to differentiate benign from malignant liver masses, both of hepatocellular origin and metastases, by quantification of their stiffness. METHODS: This study has institutional review board approval and informed consent. Eighty-nine patients (42 female and 47 male patients) with 105 liver masses had ARFI evaluation on ultrasound, S2000 (Siemens, Mountain View, Calif). Mean age of the patients was 53.67 years (range, 27-83 years). Mean diameter of the masses was 2.77 cm (range, 1.0-13.0 cm). Final diagnoses, confirmed by imaging on contrast-enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance, or ultrasound or biopsy, include hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 28), metastasis (n = 13), hemangioma (n = 35), focal nodular hyperplasia (n = 15), focal fat sparing (n = 8), focal fat deposit (n = 4), and adenoma (n = 2). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the ARFI measurement and to extract the optimal cutoff values in the differentiation of benign from malignant disease. RESULTS: Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse values showed a statistically significant difference between benign (1.73 [SD, 0.8] m/sec) and malignant masses (2.57 [SD, 1.01] m/sec) (P < 0.001). However, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.744, suggesting only fair accuracy. For differentiation of malignant from benign masses, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 68% (28/41), 69% (44/64), 58% (28/48), and 77% (44/57), respectively, when 1.9 m/sec was chosen as a cutoff value, reflective of a wide variation of ARFI values in each diagnosis. For differentiation of metastasis from benign masses, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and NPV were 69% (9/13), 89% (57/64), 56% (9/16), and 93% (57/61), respectively, when 2.72 m/sec was chosen as a cutoff value. CONCLUSIONS: Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse measurement may be helpful to differentiate benign masses from metastases, in particular. Otherwise, ARFI measurements alone do not differentiate benign and malignant masses because of variations in stiffness of all types of masses.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it