Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intraindividual comparison of CT and MRI for predicting vessels encapsulating tumor clusters in hepatocellular carcinoma

  • Oncology
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To establish and validate scoring models for predicting vessels encapsulating tumor clusters (VETC) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and to intra-individually compare the predictive performance between the two modalities.

Methods

We retrospectively included 324 patients with surgically confirmed HCC who underwent preoperative dynamic CT and MRI with extracellular contrast agent between June 2019 and August 2020. These patients were then divided into a discovery cohort (n = 227) and a validation cohort (n = 97). Imaging features and Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) categories of VETC-positive HCCs were evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were conducted on the discovery cohort to identify clinical and imaging predictors associated with VETC-positive cases. Subsequently, separate CT-based and MRI-based scoring models were developed, and their diagnostic performance was compared using generalized estimating equations.

Results

On both CT and MRI, VETC-positive HCCs exhibited a higher frequency of size > 5.0 cm, necrosis or severe ischemia, non-smooth tumor margin, targetoid appearance, intratumor artery, and heterogeneous enhancement with septations or irregular ring-like structure compared to VETC-negative HCCs (all p < 0.05). Regarding LI-RADS categories, VETC-positive HCCs were more frequently categorized as LR-M than VETC-negative cases (all p < 0.05). In the validation cohort, the CT-based model showed similar sensitivity (76.7% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.375), specificity (83.6% vs. 74.6%, p = 0.180), and area under the curve value (0.80 vs. 0.81, p = 0.910) to the MRI-based model in predicting VETC-positive HCCs.

Conclusion

Preoperative CT and MRI demonstrated comparable performance in the identification of VETC-positive HCCs, thus displaying promising predictive capabilities.

Clinical relevance statement

Both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated promise in preoperatively identifying the vessel-encapsulating tumor cluster pattern in hepatocellular carcinoma, with no statistically significant difference between the two modalities, potentially adding additional prognostic value.

Key Points

  • Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) show promise in the preoperative identification of vessels encapsulating tumor clusters-positive hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

  • HCC with vessels encapsulating tumor cluster patterns were more frequently LR-M compared to those without.

  • These CT and MRI models showed comparable ability in identifying vessels encapsulating tumor clusters-positive HCC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AFP:

Alpha-fetoprotein

APHE:

Arterial phase hyperenhancement

AUC:

Area under the curve

CT:

Computed tomography

HCC:

Hepatocellular carcinoma

LI-RADS:

Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

OR:

Odds ratio

ROC:

Receiver operating characteristic

VETC:

Vessels encapsulating tumor clusters

References

  1. Fang JH, Zhou HC, Zhang C et al (2015) A novel vascular pattern promotes metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma in an epithelial-mesenchymal transition-independent manner. Hepatology 62:452–465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu K, Dennis C, Prince DS et al (2023) Vessels that encapsulate tumour clusters vascular pattern in hepatocellular carcinoma. JHEP Rep 5:100792

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Renne SL, Woo HY, Allegra S et al (2020) Vessels encapsulating tumor clusters (VETC) is a powerful predictor of aggressive hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 71:183–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fang JH, Xu L, Shang LR et al (2019) Vessels that encapsulate tumor clusters (VETC) pattern is a predictor of sorafenib benefit in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 70:824–839

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kawasaki J, Toshima T, Yoshizumi T et al (2021) Prognostic impact of vessels that encapsulate tumor cluster (VETC) in patients who underwent liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 28:8186–8195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen ZY, Guo ZX, Lu LH et al (2021) The predictive value of vessels encapsulating tumor clusters in treatment optimization for recurrent early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Med 10:5466–5474

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Meng XP, Tang TY, Zhou Y et al (2023) Predicting post-resection recurrence by integrating imaging-based surrogates of distinct vascular patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma. JHEP Rep 5:100806

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Heimbach JK, Kulik LM, Finn RS et al (2018) AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 67:358–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. European Association for the Study of the Liver (2018) EASL clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 69:182–236

  10. Roberts LR, Sirlin CB, Zaiem F et al (2018) Imaging for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatology 67:401–421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ronot M, Chernyak V, Burgoyne A et al (2023) Imaging to predict prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma: current and future perspectives. Radiology 307:e221429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Feng Z, Li H, Zhao H et al (2021) Preoperative CT for characterization of aggressive macrotrabecular-massive subtype and vessels that encapsulate tumor clusters pattern in hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 300:219–229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kitao A, Matsui O, Zhang Y et al (2023) Dynamic CT and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI characteristics of P53-mutated hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 306:e220531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fan Y, Yu Y, Hu M et al (2021) Imaging features based on Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for predicting vessels encapsulating tumor clusters (VETC) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Radiol 94:20200950

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Chen FM, Du M, Qi X et al (2023) Nomogram estimating vessels encapsulating tumor clusters in hepatocellular carcinoma from preoperative gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 57:1893–1905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dong X, Yang J, Zhang B et al (2023) Deep learning radiomics model of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for evaluating vessels encapsulating tumor clusters and prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.28745

  17. Heo S, Kang HJ, Choi SH et al (2023) Proliferative hepatocellular carcinomas in cirrhosis: patient outcomes of LI-RADS category 4/5 and category M. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10305-y

  18. Yang J, Jiang H, Xie K et al (2022) Profiling hepatocellular carcinoma aggressiveness with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI: An intra-individual comparative study based on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System. Eur J Radiol 154:110397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Choi SH, Lee SS, Park SH et al (2019) LI-RADS classification and prognosis of primary liver cancers at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Radiology 290:388–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bae JS, Lee JM, Yoon JH et al (2021) Evaluation of LI-RADS version 2018 treatment response algorithm for hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplant candidates: intraindividual comparison between CT and hepatobiliary agent-enhanced MRI. Radiology 299:336–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kawamura Y, Ikeda K, Hirakawa M et al (2010) New classification of dynamic computed tomography images predictive of malignant characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Res 40:1006–1014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chen J, Xia C, Duan T et al (2021) Macrotrabecular-massive hepatocellular carcinoma: imaging identification and prediction based on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 31:7696–7704

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Moons KG, Altman DG, Reitsma JB et al (2015) Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 162:W1–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cannella R, Ronot M, Sartoris R et al (2021) Enhancing capsule in hepatocellular carcinoma: intra-individual comparison between CT and MRI with extracellular contrast agent. Diagn Interv Imaging 102:735–742

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jiang H, Wei J, Fu F et al (2022) Predicting microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma: a dual-institution study on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. Liver Int 42:1158–1172

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Schuurs AH, Wu MK, Wesselink PR, Duivenvoorden HJ (1993) Endodontic leakage studies reconsidered. Part II. Statistical aspects. Int Endod J 26:44–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yang T, Wei H, Wu Y et al (2023) Predicting histologic differentiation of solitary hepatocellular carcinoma up to 5 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. Insights Imaging 14:3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Mehta N, Heimbach J, Harnois DM et al (2017) Validation of a risk estimation of tumor recurrence after transplant (RETREAT) score for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplant. JAMA Oncol 3:493–500

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Wei H, Fu F, Jiang H et al (2023) Development and validation of the OSASH score to predict overall survival of hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection: a dual-institutional study. Eur Radiol 33:7631–7645

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang J, Dong X, Wang G et al (2023) Preoperative MRI features for characterization of vessels encapsulating tumor clusters and microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 48:554–566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Faure A, Dioguardi Burgio M, Cannella R et al (2024) Imaging and prognostic characterization of fat-containing hepatocellular carcinoma subtypes. Radiol Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-024-01807-w

  32. Rhee H, An C, Kim HY, Yoo JE, Park YN, Kim MJ (2019) Hepatocellular carcinoma with irregular rim-like arterial phase hyperenhancement: more aggressive pathologic features. Liver Cancer 8:24–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Choi SY, Kim SH, Park CK et al (2018) Imaging features of gadoxetic acid-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging for identifying cytokeratin 19-positive hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective observational study. Radiology 286:897–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rhee H, Cho ES, Nahm JH et al (2021) Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI of macrotrabecular-massive hepatocellular carcinoma and its prognostic implications. J Hepatol 74:109–121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study has received funding from the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation Committee-Zhejiang Society for Mathematical Medicine Joint Fund Major Project (LSD19H180003) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12090020 and 12090025).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Junhan Pan and Huizhen Huang contributed equally to this work..

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, No.79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, China

    Junhan Pan, Huizhen Huang, Siying Zhang, Yanyan Zhu, Cong Zhang, Yan-Ci Zhao & Feng Chen

  2. Department of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, No.79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, China

    Yuhao Zhang & Meng Wang

Authors
  1. Junhan Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huizhen Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Siying Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yanyan Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yuhao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Meng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Cong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yan-Ci Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Feng Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng Chen.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Feng Chen.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

Feng Chen has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Study subjects or cohorts overlap

None.

Methodology

  • Retrospective

  • Diagnostic study

  • Performed at one institution

Additional information

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pan, J., Huang, H., Zhang, S. et al. Intraindividual comparison of CT and MRI for predicting vessels encapsulating tumor clusters in hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur Radiol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10944-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10944-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation