ArticleJournal of liver cancer2025
Preventing false positive imaging diagnosis of HCC: differentiating HCC from mimickers and practical strategies.
Article in Journal of liver cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Imaging differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma, combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma, and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: pitfalls and advances.Journal of liver cancer · 2026Review
- Case Report: Hypervascular lipid-rich intrahepatic adrenocortical adenoma in the right posterior liver: a diagnostic challenge for hepatobiliary surgeons.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- "WBC-HBP Dissociation" Unveils Occult Xanthogranulomatous Inflammation Mimicking Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Diabetic Patients.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Noninvasive imaging-based diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients plays a central role in clinical practice. Current major guidelines typically rely on the radiologic hallmark of nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement followed by nonperipheral washout, criteria designed to achieve both high positive predictive value and sufficient specificity when applied within well-defined target populations. Despite these criteria, false positive diagnoses still occur and can lead to unnecessary or inappropriate treatment, as various benign and non-HCC malignant lesions may exhibit vascular features that overlap with the classic appearance of HCC. Furthermore, treatment decisions are occasionally guided by imaging findings even in patients outside the target population who are being evaluated for possible HCC, in whom vascular patterns are less specific and the risk of false positive diagnosis is inherently higher. Minimizing the risk of false positive diagnosis requires not only adherence to validated imaging criteria but also clinical and contextual integration when findings are uncertain. This includes consideration of ancillary features, tumor markers, and, when appropriate, further evaluation through biopsy, additional imaging, or follow-up. This review outlines a range of HCC mimickers and provides practical strategies to support accurate imaging interpretation and reduce false positive diagnoses in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.