ArticlePloS one2017
The impact of an additional extra-hepatic primary malignancy on the outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction of overall survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and second primary malignancies: a prognostic model based on the SEER database.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Article
- Second Primary Malignancies in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Population-Based Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Early Fibrosis but Late Tumor Stage and Worse Outcomes in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Without Hepatitis B or Hepatitis C.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
- Case Report of Synchronous Prostate, Hepatocellular, and Rectal Carcinomas and Review of the Literature.Case reports in surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of additional extra-hepatic primary cancer (EHPC) on the outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains uncertain.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the cancer registration database from a tertiary hospital in Southern Taiwan. Patients who were diagnosed with HCC from 2008 to 2012 were enrolled. Overall survival (OS), HCC-specific survival and recurrence after curative therapy were analyzed and compared between the patients with and the patients without EHPC.
resultsEHPC was found in 121/1506 (8.0%) patients. HCC patients with EHPC were older, more likely to be classified as Child-Pugh A, less likely to have viral hepatitis B or C, more likely to be single, had early stage HCC and received curative therapy for HCC. The OS did not significantly differ between the patients with and without EHPC(p = 0.061). However, significantly higher HCC-specific survival was observed in patients with EHPC (p<0.001), and a higher rate of non-HCC mortality was demonstrated in patients with EHPC (54.4% vs 9.3%). The subgroup analysis revealed better OS in patients with EHPC who were older than 65, had viral hepatitis B or C, had non-stage 1 HCC, had non-early stage BCLC and received non-curative therapy. Conversely, patients with HCC stage 1 who received curative therapy exhibited worse OS if they also had EHPC. The analysis of recurrence after curative therapy showed no difference between the two groups.
conclusionsOur results implied that EHPC did not affect OS, but HCC-related survival was better in patients with EHPC. Based on these findings, the management of additional primary cancer is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.