ReviewFrontiers of medicine2014
Advances in managing hepatocellular carcinoma.
Review in Frontiers of medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hepatocellular carcinoma: Can LI-RADS v2017 with gadoxetic-acid enhancement magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging improve diagnostic accuracy?World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Effects of sorafenib and cisplatin on preneoplastic foci of altered hepatocytes in fetal turkey liver.Toxicology research · 2017Article
- The lymphatic system and pancreatic cancer.Cancer letters · 2016Review
- Clinical observation of liver cancer patients treated with axitinib and cabozantinib after failed sorafenib treatment: a case report and literature review.Cancer biology & therapy · 2015Review
- Selective Cytotoxicity of 1,3,4-Thiadiazolium Mesoionic Derivatives on Hepatocarcinoma Cells (HepG2).PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple modalities for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma are available, depending on tumor size and number. Surgical resection remains the gold standard, so long as the residual liver function reserve is sufficient. In patients with advanced cirrhosis, liver transplantation is the preferred option, as these patients may not have adequate hepatic reserve after resection. Salvage liver transplantation has also become an option for a select few patients who recur after surgical resection. Ablative techniques have been used for palliation as well as to either completely destroy the tumor, act as an adjunct to resection, or downstage the tumor to meet Milan criteria such that a patient may be a candidate for liver transplantation. Radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, chemoembolization, radioembolization, and irreversible electroporation have all been used in this capacity. Currently, sorafenib is the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved chemotherapeutic for hepatocellular carcinoma. The efficacy of sorafenib, in combination with other agents, transarterial chemoembolization, and surgical resection is currently being investigated. Sunitinib and brivanib, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, have failed as potential first- or second-line options for chemotherapy. Bevacizumab in combination with erlotinib is also currently being studied. Final analysis for ramucirumab and axitinib are pending. Tivantinib, a selective mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) inhibitor, is also undergoing clinical trials for efficacy in MET-high tumors. This review serves to emphasize the current and new technologies emerging in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24810646What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.