Differences between CEUS LI-RADS and CECT LI-RADS in the diagnosis of focal liver lesions in patients at risk for HCC.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the inter-modality consistency and diagnostic performances of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) LI-RADS in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), so as to help clinicians to select a more appropriate modality to follow the focal liver lesions (FLLs). METHODS: This retrospective study included untreated 277 FLLs from 247 patients who underwent both CEUS and CECT within 1 month. The ultrasound contrast medium used was SonoVue. FLL categories were independently assigned by two ultrasound physicians and two radiologists using CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and CECT LI-RADS v2018, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEUS and CECT LI-RADS were evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value. Cohen's Kappa was employed to evaluate the concordance of the LI-RADS category. RESULTS: The inter-modality consistency for CEUS and CECT LI-RADS was 0.31 (p < 0.001). HCC was more frequently observed in CECT LR-3 and LR-4 hepatic lesions than in CEUS (7.3% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.001). The specificity and PPV of CEUS and CECT LR-5 for the diagnosis of HCC were 89.5%, 95.0%, and 82.5%, 94.4%, respectively. The sensitivity of CEUS LR-5 + LR-M for the diagnosis of hepatic malignancies was higher than that of CECT (93.7% vs. 82.7%, p < 0.001). The specificity and PPV of CEUS LR-M for the diagnosis of non-HCC malignancies were lower than those of CECT (59.7% vs. 95.5%, p < 0.001; 23.4% vs. 70.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The inter-modality consistency between the CEUS and CECT LI-RADS categories is fair. CEUS LI-RADS was more sensitive than CECT LI-RADS in terms of identifying hepatic malignancies, but weaker in terms of separating HCC from non-HCC malignancies.

Overexpression of MiR-452-5p in hepatocellular carcinoma tissues and its prospective signaling pathways.

BACKGROUND: The implication of miR-452-5p and its prospective machinery in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains largely unknown. For this reason, this study aimed to inspect the clinical implication of miR-452-5p expression in HCC tissues with multiple detection approaches, to analyze its potential function via in silico methods, and to validate this using a dual-luciferase reporter assay. METHODS: The assessment of the expression level of miR-452-5p in HCC was conducted via four methods: 1) in-house real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR), 2) miRNA-sequencing (miRNA-seq) from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), 3) miRNA microarrays from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), and 4) comprehensive meta-analyses calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) and summary of receiver operator characteristic (sROC). Following the target prediction, one of the potential targets of miR-452-5p was validated through a dual-luciferase reporter assay. RESULTS: MiR-452-5p was consistently elevated in HCC tissues via various detection methods, including in-house RT-qPCR, miRNA-seq, and miRNA microarrays. The final SMD was 0.842 for 820 cases of HCC samples. Simultaneously, the area under curve (AUC) of the sROC was 0.80 (0.76-0.83). The 1,135 predicted targets of miR-452-5p were enriched in the pathways of cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction, carbon metabolism, and complement and coagulation cascades. Among these predicted targets, CDKN1B was verified to be a real target of miR-452-5p. CONCLUSION: The overexpression of miR-452-5p may play a pivotal role in the carcinogenesis of HCC via targeting multiple signaling pathways and genes. The function and molecular machinery of miR-452-5p in HCC requires further in-depth exploration.