Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29151326›Full record

ReviewClinical and molecular hepatology2017

Treatment options after sorafenib failure in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Imane El Dika, Ghassan K Abou-Alfa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical and molecular hepatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Imane El DikaMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Ghassan K Abou-AlfaMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1522-8054

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Second line therapy after failure of sorafenib continues to be under study. Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma is measured in months, with median overall survival reaching 10.7 months with sorafenib. Because of the modest net benefit sorafenib has contributed, and rising incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the world, continued efforts are ongoing to look for efficient upfront, second line, or combination therapies. Herein we review the most relevant to date published literature on treatment options beyond sorafenib, reported studies, ongoing investigational efforts, and possibilities for future studies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyAntibodies, MonoclonalCarcinoma, HepatocellularHumansLiver NeoplasmsPhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyridinesSorafenibTreatment FailureAntibodies, MonoclonalPhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyridinesregorafenibSorafenibAntiangiogenic therapyHepatocellular carcinomaImmunotherapyMET-inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID29151326
PMCPMC5760005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.