MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972513363 · doi:10.1097/meg.0000000000001528

Annual contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging is highly effective in the surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma among cirrhotic patients

2019· article· en· W2972513363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Coşkun Özer Demirtaş, Feyza Gündüz, Davut Tüney, Feyyaz Baltacıoğlu, Haluk Tarık Kani, Onur Buğdaycı, Yeşim Özen Alahdab, Osman Cavit Özdoğan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaStage (stratigraphy)Magnetic resonance imagingHCCSRadiologyLiver cancerInternal medicineNuclear medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Biannual ultrasonography, a globally accepted surveillance method, has low sensitivity in detecting early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a surveillance strategy using annual contrast-enhanced MRI to detect HCCs at early-stage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the data of 294 patients with consistent annual contrast-enhanced MRI and biannual alpha fetoprotein (AFP) surveillance between 2008 and 2017. Patients were stratified for HCC risk as low-intermediate-high risk group using Toronto risk score. HCCs were classified according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system. RESULTS: Thirty-five (11.9%) HCCs were detected with annual surveillance MRI. Of those, 30 (85.8%) were early-stage and 15 (42.9%) were very early-stage. The majority of patients (82.9%) with surveillance detected HCC were high risk at the entry. MRI had sensitivity of 83.3 and 80% with a specificity of 95.4 and 91.4%, for detecting early and very early-stage HCC, respectively. Addition of AFP to MRI displayed similar sensitivity and specificity rates to detect early and very early HCCs. The area under the curve of MRI alone and combination with AFP was not statistically different (Any-HCC: 0.905 vs. 0.924; Early-HCC: 0.853 vs. 0.885; Very early-HCC: 0.838 vs. 0.885, respectively, all P values >0.2). CONCLUSION: Annual MRI strategy demonstrated a satisfactory performance in the surveillance of HCC, in terms of detecting most of the lesions in earlier curable stages and indicating high sensitivity with no additional benefit of biannual AFP. New risk stratified screening algorithms may further increase the yield of HCC surveillance among cirrhotic patients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Gastroenterology & HepatologySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207