Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39498462›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

Development of fully automated models for staging liver fibrosis using non-contrast MRI and artificial intelligence: a retrospective multicenter study.

Chunli Li, Yuan Wang, Ruobing Bai, Zhiyong Zhao, Wenjuan Li, Qianqian Zhang, Chaoya Zhang, Wei Yang, Qi Liu, Na Su and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. [Fatigue in the general population: results of the "German Health Update 2023" study].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors.

Chunli LiDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Yuan WangDepartment of Radiology, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Ruobing BaiDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Zhiyong ZhaoDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Wenjuan LiDepartment of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, Yantai, Shandong, China.
Qianqian ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital, Qingdao University, Yantai, Shandong, China.
Chaoya ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Hubei Cancer Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Wei YangDepartment of Radiology, Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital & Institute, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Qi LiuDepartment of Radiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Baotou Medical College, Baotou, Neimenggu, China.
Na SuDepartment of Radiology, The Sixth People's Hospital of Shenyang, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Yueyue LuDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Xiaoli YinDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Fan WangDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Chengli GuDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Aoran YangDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Baihe LuoDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Minghui ZhouDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Liuhanxu ShenDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Chen PanDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Zhiying WangDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Qijun WuDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Jiandong YinDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Yang HouDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Yu ShiDepartment of Radiology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Accurate staging of liver fibrosis (LF) is essential for clinical management in chronic liver disease. While non-contrast MRI (NC-MRI) yields valuable information for liver assessment, its effectiveness in predicting LF remains underexplored. This study aimed to develop and validate artificial intelligence (AI)-powered models utilizing NC-MRI for staging LF. Methods: A total of 1726 patients from Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, registered between October 2003 and October 2022, were retrospectively collected, and divided into development (n = 1208) and internal test (n = 518) cohorts. An external test cohort consisting of 337 individuals from six centers, registered between June 2015 and November 2022, were also included. All participants underwent NC-MRI (T1-weighted imaging, T1WI; and T2-fat-suppressed imaging, T2FS) and liver biopsies. Two classification models (CMs), named T1 and T2FS, were trained on respective image types using 3D contextual transformer networks and evaluated on both test cohorts. Additionally, three CMs-Clinic, Image, and Fusion-were developed using clinical features, T1 and T2FS scores, and their integration via logistic regression. Classification effectiveness of CMs was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). A comparison was conducted between the optimal models (OMs) with highest AUC and other methods (transient elastography, five serum biomarkers, and six radiologists). Findings: Fusion models (i.e., OM) yielded the highest AUC among the CMs, achieving AUCs of 0.810 for significant fibrosis, 0.881 for advanced fibrosis, and 0.918 for cirrhosis in the internal test cohort, and 0.808, 0.868, and 0.925, respectively, in the external test cohort. The OMs demonstrated superior performance in AUC, significantly surpassing transient elastography (only for staging ≥ F2 and ≥ F3 grades), serum biomarkers, and three junior radiologists for staging LF. Radiologists, with the aid of the OMs, can achieve a higher AUC in LF assessment. Interpretation: AI-powered models utilizing NC-MRI, including T1WI and T2FS, accurately stage LF. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82071885); General Program of the Liaoning Provincial Department of Education (LJKMZ20221160); Liaoning Province Science and Technology Joint Plan (2023JH2/101700127); the Leading Young Talent Program of Xingliao Yingcai in Liaoning Province (XLYC2203037).

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceLiver fibrosisMulticenter studyNon-contrast MRI

Identifiers

PMID39498462
PMCPMC11532432

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.