Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29034348›Full record

ReviewTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2017

Selection of patients with hepatocellular cancer: a difficult balancing between equity, utility, and benefit.

Alessandro Vitale, Quirino Lai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. New Insights in the Setting of Transplant Oncology.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: pushing to the limits?Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alessandro VitaleDepartment of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, Padua; Italy.
Quirino LaiLiver Transplant and Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although liver transplantation (LT) represents the gold-standard strategy for hepatocellular cancer (HCC), its use is circumscribed by several factors like donor shortage, perioperative complications, or competition with other candidates without HCC. Moreover, different alternative approaches like resection or loco-regional therapies may be attempted in selected cases. The best option for the treatment of an HCC patient is a complex decision, involving several ethical principles including: equity (horizontal equity and vertical equity or urgency), and utility. These principles influence the different phases of the patient selection process for LT: inscription in the waiting list (WL), deciding upon patient priority and drop-out before LT, allocating the liver donor to the best matched recipient. The best end-point for describing the principle of utility is the "transplant benefit" (TB). This concept expresses the survival gain obtained comparing LT with the best alternative therapies (i.e., difference between life years obtained with and without LT). The TB used with a mid-term time horizon (post-transplant 5-10 years), has the intrinsic potential to reach the dignity of an independent LT selection principle. Thus, the present review investigates the role of organ allocation using a TB model with the intent to introduce equity among patients transplanted having HCC or non-tumoral diseases.

Indexed as

equityHepatocellular cancer (HCC)liver transplantation (LT)transplant benefit (TB)urgencyutility

Identifiers

PMID29034348
PMCPMC5639024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.