MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415105654 · doi:10.1093/bjr/tqaf256

Harnessing intrinsic cardiac motion <i>vs.</i> external mechanical vibrations: a comparison of MRI cine-tagging and MR elastography for liver fibrosis assessment

2025· article· en· W4415105654 on OpenAlexafffund
Thierry Lefebvre, Anton Volniansky, Léonie Petitclerc, Emmanuel Montagnon, Giada Sebastiani, Jeanne‐Marie Giard, Marie-Pierre Sylvestre, Bich Nguyen, Guillaume Gilbert, Guy Cloutier, An Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Radiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPhilips (Canada)McGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalCARE CanadaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersInstitute of Nutrition, Metabolism and DiabetesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéFondation de l'Association des radiologistes du QuébecSiemens HealthineersUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsMagnetic resonance elastographyCirrhosisLiver fibrosisMagnetic resonance imagingElastographyUltrasonographyUltrasound elastography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of MRI cine-tagging and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) for staging histologically confirmed liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver disease. METHODS: MRI cine-tagging evaluates liver strain as the deformation induced by intrinsic cardiac motion on the left liver lobe, whereas MRE captures liver stiffness in response to externally applied vibrations from a mechanical driver. A head-to-head comparison of MRI cine-tagging and MRE was performed in 76 participants with biopsy-proven chronic liver disease. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were assessed. AUCs were compared using the Delong method. RESULTS: MRE-derived shear modulus increased, while strain obtained from tagged cine MRI decreased with higher fibrosis stages (ρ = 0.73 and ρ = -0.67, respectively; P < .0001). Both shear modulus and strain values exhibited significant differences across fibrosis stages (P < .0001) and correlated with each other (ρ = -0.44, P < .0001). MRE provided higher AUCs than MRI cine-tagging only for distinguishing stages ≤F3 vs. F4 (0.91 vs. 0.87, P = .043). There were no significant differences in AUCs for differentiating other dichotomized fibrosis stages, including stages F0 vs. ≥F1 (0.87 vs. 0.81, P = .083), ≤F1 vs. ≥F2 (0.84 vs. 0.84, P = .889), and ≤F2 vs. ≥F3 (0.89 vs. 0.86, P = .116). CONCLUSION: MRI cine-tagging provided a similar diagnostic performance compared to MRE for staging liver fibrosis, except for the diagnosis of cirrhosis (F4). It is possible to assess liver strain as part of abdominal MRI screening, offering additional insight into the left lobe without the need for additional equipment. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: A head-to-head comparison of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), the most accurate technique for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis, and MRI cine-tagging has not been performed yet. We found that MRI cine-tagging, having the advantage of not requiring any additional hardware, provides a similar diagnostic performance compared to MRE for staging liver fibrosis, except for the diagnosis of cirrhosis in patients with chronic liver disease.

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of RadiologySame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207