Cancer Res Treat.  2023 Jul;55(3):939-947. 10.4143/crt.2022.1645.

Intraindividual Comparison of MRIs with Extracellular and Hepatobiliary Contrast Agents for the Noninvasive Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using the Korean Liver Cancer Association–National Cancer Center 2022 Criteria

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 2Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 3Department of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Abstract

Purpose
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the per-lesion sensitivity and specificity of the Korean Liver Cancer Association–National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) 2022 criteria for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with intraindividual comparison of the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging with extracellular agents (ECA-MRI) and hepatobiliary agents (HBA-MRI).
Materials and Methods
Patients at high risk for HCC who were referred to a tertiary academic institution for hepatic lesions with size ≥ 10 mm between July 2019 and June 2022 were enrolled. A total of 91 patients (mean age, 58.1 years; 76 men and 15 women) with 118 lesions who underwent both ECA-MRI and HBA-MRI were eligible for final analysis. The per-lesion sensitivities and specificities of the KLCA-NCC 2022 criteria using ECA-MRI and HBA-MRI were compared using McNemar’s test.
Results
The 118 lesions were 93 HCCs, 4 non-HCC malignancies, and 21 benign lesions. On HBA-MRI, the “definite” HCC category showed significantly higher sensitivity than ECA-MRI (78.5% vs. 58.1%, p < 0.001), with identical specificity (92.0% vs. 92.0%, p > 0.999). For “probable” or “definite” HCC categories, there were no differences in the sensitivity (84.9% vs. 84.9%, p > 0.999) and specificity (84.0% vs. 84.0%, p > 0.999) between ECA-MRI and HBA-MRI.
Conclusion
The “definite” HCC category of the KLCA-NCC 2022 criteria showed higher sensitivity in diagnosing HCC on HBA-MRI compared with ECA-MRI, without compromising specificity. There were no significant differences in the sensitivity and specificity of “probable” or “definite” HCC categories according to ECA-MRI and HBA-MRI.

Keyword

Hepatocellular carcinoma; Magnetic resonance imaging; Gadolinium; Radiology

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Flowchart of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study population. ECA-MRI, magnetic resonance imaging with an extracellular agent; HBA-MRI, magnetic resonance imaging with a hepatobiliary agent; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma.

  • Fig. 2 Categorization of a pathologically confirmed HCC on ECA-MRI and HBA-MRI according to the KLCA-NCC 2022 criteria. A 3.2-cm sized mass in the right posterior section of the liver (arrows) shows moderate T2 hyperintensity and T1 hypointensity. The lesion did not show targetoid appearance on DWI nor enhanced sequences. On ECA-MRI, the mass showed APHE without demonstrable washout appearance during the PVP or DP, and was categorized as “probable” HCC. On HBA-MRI, the mass showed APHE without washout appearance on PVP, but with washout appearance on HBP, and was categorized as “definite” HCC. AP, arterial phase; APHE, arterial phase hyperenhancement; DP, delayed phase; DWI, diffusion-weighted images; ECA-MRI, magnetic resonance imaging with an extracellular agent; HBA-MRI, magnetic resonance imaging with a hepatobiliary agent; HBP, hepatobiliary phase; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; KLCA-NCC, Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center; PVP, portal venous phase.


Reference

References

1. Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, Zhu AX, Finn RS, Abecassis MM, et al. Diagnosis, staging, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2018 practice guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Clin Liver Dis. 2019; 13:1.
Article
2. Asrani SK, Devarbhavi H, Eaton J, Kamath PS. Burden of liver diseases in the world. J Hepatol. 2019; 70:151–71.
Article
3. Omata M, Cheng AL, Kokudo N, Kudo M, Lee JM, Jia J, et al. Asia-Pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: a 2017 update. Hepatol Int. 2017; 11:317–70.
Article
4. European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2018; 69:182–236.
5. American College of Radiology. Committee on LI-RADS® (Liver). Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 Core [Internet]. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology;2018. [cited 2022 Oct 1]. Available from: https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/RADS/LI-RADS/LI-RADS-2018-Core.pdf?la=en.
6. Korean Liver Cancer Association (KLCA); National Cancer Center (NCC). 2018 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Korean J Radiol. 2019; 20:1042–113.
7. Kim TH, Kim SY, Tang A, Lee JM. Comparison of international guidelines for noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2018 update. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2019; 25:245–63.
Article
8. Korean Liver Cancer Association (KLCA); National Cancer Center. 2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2022; 28:583–705.
9. Kim TK, Lee KH, Jang HJ, Haider MA, Jacks LM, Menezes RJ, et al. Analysis of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR findings for characterizing small (1–2-cm) hepatic nodules in patients at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology. 2011; 259:730–8.
Article
10. Tang A, Bashir MR, Corwin MT, Cruite I, Dietrich CF, Do RK, et al. Evidence supporting LI-RADS major features for CT- and MR imaging-based diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. Radiology. 2018; 286:29–48.
11. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960; 20:37–46.
Article
12. Byun J, Choi SH, Byun JH, Lee SJ, Kim SY, Won HJ, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of imaging criteria for HCCs ≤ 3.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. Hepatol Int. 2020; 14:534–43.
13. Jeon SK, Lee JM, Joo I, Yoo J, Park JY. Comparison of guidelines for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in transplantation candidates. Eur Radiol. 2020; 30:4762–71.
Article
14. Lee S, Kim MJ. Validation of the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center 2018 criteria for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging. J Liver Cancer. 2020; 20:120–7.
Article
15. Lee S, Kim SS, Chang DR, Kim H, Kim MJ. Comparison of LI-RADS 2018 and KLCA-NCC 2018 for noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2020; 26:340–51.
Article
16. Kim DH, Kim B, Youn SY, Kim H, Choi JI. Diagnostic performance of KLCA-NCC 2018 criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11:1763.
Article
17. Hwang SH, Park MS, Park S, Lim JS, Kim SU, Park YN. Comparison of the current guidelines for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma using gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2021; 31:4492–503.
Article
18. Park SH, Shim YS, Kim B, Kim SY, Kim YS, Huh J, et al. Retrospective analysis of current guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in at-risk patients. Eur Radiol. 2021; 31:4751–63.
Article
19. Lee SM, Lee JM, Ahn SJ, Kang HJ, Yang HK, Yoon JH. Diagnostic performance of 2018 KLCA-NCC practice guideline for hpatocellular carcinoma on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in patients with chronic hepatitis B or cirrhosis: comparison with LI-RADS version 2018. Korean J Radiol. 2021; 22:1066–76.
Article
20. Joo I, Lee JM, Lee DH, Jeon JH, Han JK, Choi BI. Noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI: can hypointensity on the hepatobiliary phase be used as an alternative to washout? Eur Radiol. 2015; 25:2859–68.
21. Choi MH, Choi JI, Lee YJ, Park MY, Rha SE, Lall C. MRI of small hepatocellular carcinoma: typical features are less frequent below a size cutoff of 1.5 cm. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 208:544–51.
Article
22. Yoon J, Hwang JA, Lee S, Lee JE, Ha SY, Park YN. Clinicopathologic and MRI features of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma in patients with or without cirrhosis. Liver Int. 2021; 41:1641–51.
Full Text Links
  • CRT
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr