One‐month apparent diffusion coefficient correlates with response to radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To assess whether apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values at 1 and 3 months after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) may be associated with a favorable response to therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver metastases. Materials and Methods Fifty‐nine patients with HCC ( n = 35) or liver metastases ( n = 24) who underwent 1.5T diffusion‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWMRI) at 1 and 3 months post‐RFA were included. ADC values of patients with local tumor recurrence were compared to those without local recurrence. A subgroup analysis was performed for HCC and metastases. Results Thirty‐eight HCC and 27 metastases were evaluated. The ADC value of HCC at 1 month after RFA was lower in recurrent tumors (0.957 ± 0.229 [SD] × 10 −3 mm 2 ) compared to tumors with complete response (1.414 ± 0.322 [SD] × 10 −3 mm 2 /s, P = 0.006). At multivariate analysis, ADC at 1 month was the single independent variable associated with recurrence for HCC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.860). No significant association was observed for liver metastases ( P = 0.089). Conclusion A low ADC value at 1 month after RFA is associated with an early local recurrence of HCC. This study does not confirm that such association exists for hepatic metastases. Level of Evidence : 3 Technical Efficacy : Stage 2 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1648–1658
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".