Background: Liver-spleen contrast in the hepatobiliary phase highly depends on the devices used for liver function tests. This study aimed to develop and validate a method to convert liver-spleen contrast data acquired with another device to reference liver-spleen contrast data, using the regression line of phantom contrasts (i.e., cross-calibration).Methods: As cohort studies, two-dimensional gradient echo images of T1-weighted fat-suppression in the hepatobiliary phase were retrospectively obtained and analyzed for a total of 126 patients who underwent gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using four different magnetic resonance imaging scanner-coil combinations. The liver-spleen contrast measured from these images was converted into reference liver-spleen contrast using cross-calibration with purified water and gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid phantoms of 0.06, 0.14, 0.27, 0.63, 1.37, and 2.82 mM/L. At this point, the error of the regression lines with phantom contrasts was assessed and corrected. Lastly, the liver-spleen and converted liver-spleen contrasts, which are the values before and after cross-calibration respectively, were compared with reference liver-spleen contrast in three cases using different coils and magnetic resonance imaging scanners from a reference device.Results: Regarding the regression lines with phantom contrasts, the coefficient of determination was 0.99.Although regression lines with phantom contrasts tended to be 0.0105 lower in logarithmic contrasts than those with liver-spleen contrast, no significant difference was observed between the two lines (P=0.0612) by analysis of covariance. In the case of different coils, there was a significant difference between liver-spleen and reference liver-spleen contrasts (P<0.00001), but there was no significant difference between converted liver-spleen and reference liver-spleen contrasts (P=0.492). Moreover, the regression equation between converted liver-spleen and reference liver-spleen contrasts corresponded with an identity line. Likewise, in the two cases of different magnetic resonance imaging scanners, there was a significant difference between liver-spleen and reference liver-spleen contrast (both P<0.00001), but there was no significant difference between converted liver-spleen and reference liver-spleen contrast (P=0.923 and P=0.541).Conclusions: Cross-calibration using the precision and valid regression lines with phantom contrasts had high accuracy and utility.^ ORCDI: 0000-0003-1378-5970.