MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387159567 · doi:10.1007/s00330-023-10237-7

Can absolute arterial phase hyperenhancement improve sensitivity of detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in indeterminate nodules on CT?

2023· article· en· W4387159567 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Zafar, Khaled Y. Elbanna, A.W. Todd, Luís Guimarães, Ciara O’Brien, Ankur Goel, Tae Kyoung Kim, Korosh Khalili

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Radiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaNeuroradiologyNuclear medicineRadiologyCarcinomaInterventional radiologyNodule (geology)KappaPathologyInternal medicineNeurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine if quantitative assessment of relative (R) and absolute (A) arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) and washout (WO) applied to indeterminate nodules on CT would improve the overall sensitivity of detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: One-hundred and fourteen patients (90 male; mean age, 65 years) with 210 treatment-naïve HCC nodules (190 HCCs, 20 benign) who underwent 4-phase CT were included in this retrospective study. Four radiologists independently assigned a qualitative LR (LI-RADS) category per nodule. LR-3/4 nodules were then quantitatively analyzed by the 4 readers, placing ROIs within nodules and adjacent liver parenchyma. A/R-APHE and WO were calculated, and per-reader sensitivity and specificity updated. Interobserver agreement and AUCs were calculated per reader. RESULTS: Qualitative readers 1-4 categorized 57, 69, 57, and 63 nodules as LR-3/4 respectively with moderate to substantial agreement in LR category (kappa 0.56-0.69, p < 0.0001); their diagnostic performances in the detection of HCC were 80%, 73.2%, 77.4%, and 77.4% sensitivity, and 100%, 95%, 70%, and 100% specificity, respectively. A threshold of ≥ 20 HU for A-APHE increased overall sensitivity of HCC detection by 0.5-3.1% without changing specificity for the subset of nodules APHE - /WO + on qualitative read, with 2, 6, 6, and 1 additional HCC detected by readers 1-4. Relative and various A-WO formulae and thresholds all increased sensitivity, but with a drop in specificity for some/all readers. CONCLUSION: Quantitatively assessed A-APHE showed potential to increase sensitivity and maintain specificity of HCC diagnosis when selectively applied to indeterminate nodules demonstrating WO without subjective APHE. Quantitatively assessed R and A-WO increased sensitivity, however reduced specificity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A workflow using selective quantification of absolute arterial enhancement is routinely employed in the CT assessment of renal and adrenal nodules. Quantitatively assessed absolute arterial enhancement is a simple tool which may be used as an adjunct to help increase sensitivity and maintain specificity of HCC diagnosis in indeterminate nodules demonstrating WO without subjective APHE. KEY POINTS: • In indeterminate nodules categorized as LI-RADS 3/4 due to absent subjective arterial phase hyperenhancement, a cut-off for absolute arterial phase hyperenhancement of ≥ 20 HU may increase the overall sensitivity of detection of HCC by 0.5-3.1% without affecting specificity. • Relative and various absolute washout formulae and cut-offs increased sensitivity of HCC detection, but with a drop in specificity for some/all readers.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean RadiologySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207