Skip to main content

Table 3 Diagnostic performances of the radiomics model, EASL and LI-RADS criteria

From: Man or machine? Prospective comparison of the version 2018 EASL, LI-RADS criteria and a radiomics model to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma

All lesionsEASLaLI-RADSaRadiomics modelbp value
L5/5VL4/4V/5/5 Vp valueEASL vs RaddEASL vs L5/5VRad vs L5/5Vd
All nodules, n = 229
 Sen91% (95%CI: 0.85–0.95)86% (95%CI: 0.80–0.91)94% (95%CI: 0.89–0.97)0.01973% (95%CI: 0.61–0.83)0.0060.5310.076
 Spe71% (95%CI: 0.58–0.83)82% (95%CI: 0.70–0.91)73% (95%CI: 0.60–0.84)0.25477% (95%CI: 0.55–0.92)1.0000.5281.000
 PPV91% (95%CI: 0.87–0.94)94% (95%CI: 0.89–0.86)92% (95%CI: 0.87–0.94)0.99991% (95%CI: 0.8–0.97)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV71% (95%CI: 0.60–0.80)66% (95%CI: 0.56–0.74)79% (95%CI: 0.67–0.87)0.10147% (95%CI: 0.3–0.65)0.0561.0000.199
 AUC0.811 (95%CI: 0.754–0.859)0.841 (95%CI: 0.787–0.886)0.834 (95%CI: 0.780–0.880)0.7450.810 (95%CI: 0.690–0.931)1.0000.7611.000
Cirrhotic liver, n = 136
 Sen92% (95%CI: 0.85–0.96)86% (95%CI: 0.78–0.92)93% (95%CI: 0.86–0.97)0.08270% (95%CI: 0.55–0.83)0.0070.4080.112
 Spe63% (95%CI: 0.41–0.81)79% (95%CI: 0.58–0.93)71% (95%CI: 0.49–0.87)0.50362% (95%CI: 0.32–0.86)1.0000.5880.797
 PPV92% (95%CI: 0.87–0.95)95% (95%CI: 0.90–0.98)94% (95%CI: 0.89–0.97)0.99987% (95%CI: 0.72–0.96)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV63% (95%CI: 0.45–0.77)54% (95%CI: 0.42–0.66)68% (95%CI: 0.51–0.81)0.27536% (95%CI: 0.17–0.59)0.1991.0000.530
 AUC0.772 (95%CI: 0.693–0.840)0.824 (95%CI: 0.750–0.884)0.818 (95%CI: 0.743–0.879)0.8490.715 (95%CI: 0.524–0.906)1.0000.6120.897
Non-cirrhotic liver, n = 93
 Sen89% (95%CI: 0.78–0.95)87% (95%CI: 0.76–0.94)95% (95%CI: 0.86–0.99)0.66878% (95%CI: 0.56–0.93)0.8431.0001.000
 Spe78% (95%CI: 0.60–0.91)84% (95%CI: 0.67–0.95)75% (95%CI: 0.57–0.89)0.275100% (95%CI: 0.66–1)0.0081.0000.045
 PPV89% (95%CI: 0.80–0.94)91% (95%CI: 0.82–0.96)88% (95%CI: 0.80–0.93)0.994100% (95%CI: 0.81–1)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV78% (95%CI: 0.63–0.88)77% (95%CI: 0.63–0.87)89% (95%CI: 0.72–0.96)0.50364% (95%CI: 0.35–0.87)1.0001.0001.000
 AUC0.833 95%CI: 0.742–0.903)0.856 (95%CI: 0.768–0.920)0.850 (95%CI: 0.761–0.916)0.8520.923 (95%CI: 0.829–1)0.6311.0000.981
≤2 cm, n = 34
 Sen86% (95%CI: 0.64–0.97)76% (95%CI: 0.53–0.92)95% (95%CI: 0.76–1)0.06738% (95%CI: 0.09–0.76)0.0301.0000.141
 Spe69% (95%CI: 0.39–0.91)77% (95%CI: 0.46–0.95)62% (95%CI: 0.32–0.86)0.38988% (95%CI: 0.47–1)0.8760.6061.000
 PPV82% (95%CI: 0.66–0.91)84% (95%CI: 0.66–0.94)80% (95%CI: 0.67–0.89)0.99275% (95%CI: 0.19–0.99)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV75% (95%CI: 0.50–0.90)67% (95%CI: 0.47–0.82)89% (95%CI: 0.53–0.98)0.16658% (95%CI: 0.28–0.85)1.0001.0001.000
 AUC0.775 (95%CI: 0.599–0.900)0.766 (95%CI: 0.589–0.893)0.784 (95%CI: 0.610–0.906)0.7880.859 (95%CI: 0.658–1)1.0001.0001.000
>2 cm, ≤5 cm, n = 83
 Sen85% (95%CI: 0.74–0.93)80% (95% CI: 0.68–0.89)95% (95% CI: 0.86–0.99)0.01168% (95%CI: 0.45–0.86)0.3541.0000.829
 Spe82% (95%CI: 0.60–0.95)91% (95% CI: 0.71–0.99)82% (95% CI: 0.60–0.95)0.37582% (95%CI: 0.48–0.98)1.0001.0001.000
 PPV93% (95%CI: 0.84–0.97)96% (95%CI: 0.87–0.99)94% (95% CI: 0.86–0.97)0.99788% (95%CI: 0.64–0.99)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV67% (95%CI: 0.51–0.79)63% (95%CI: 0.50–0.74)86% (95%CI: 0.66–0.95)0.04356% (95%CI: 0.30–0.80)1.00011.0001.000
 AUC0.835 (95%CI: 0.738–0.908)0.856 (95%CI: 0.762–0.924)0.885 (95%CI: 0.796–0.944)0.4660.806 (95%CI: 0.617–0.994)1.0001.0001.000
>5 cm, n = 112
 Sen96% (95%CI: 0.89–0.99)92% (95% CI: 0.85–0.97)92% (95% CI: 0.85–0.97)1.00083% (95%CI: 0.67–0.93)0.0631.0000.514
 Spe62% (95%CI: 0.38–0.82)76% (95% CI: 0.53–0.92)71% (95% CI: 0.48–0.89)0.72567% (95%CI: 0.09–0.99)1.0000.9331.000
 PPV92% (95%CI: 0.86–0.95)94% (95%CI: 0.89–0.97)93% (95%CI: 0.88–0.97)0.99993% (95%CI: 0.81–0.99)1.0001.0001.000
 NPV76% (95%CI: 0.54–0.90)70% (95%CI: 0.52–0.83)68% (95%CI: 0.50–0.82)0.92022% (95%CI: 0.09–0.45)1.0001.0001.000
 AUC0.788 (95%CI: 0.700–0.859)0.842 (95%CI: 0.762–0.904)0.819 (95%CI: 0.735–0.885)0.3170.746 (95%CI: 0.590–0.866)0.3030.9150.627
  1. Abbreviations: EASL European Association for the Study of the Liver, LI-RADS Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System, L4 LR-4, 4 V LR-TIV in the presence of LR-4 lesions, L5 LR-5, 5 V LR-TIV in the presence of LR-5 lesions, Rad radiomics model, Sen sensitivity, Spe specificity, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, AUC area under the receiver operating characteristic curve
  2. aDiagnostic measures were evaluated in the combined cohort comprising all patients
  3. bDiagnostic measures were evaluated in the validation cohort
  4. dComparisons were made in the validation cohort
  5. P values were corrected with the Bonferroni method
  6. ¶Comparisons were made in the combined cohort comprising all patients