Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29285366›Full record

ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2017

Clinical effects and safety of intra-arterial infusion therapy of cisplatin suspension in lipiodol combined with 5-fluorouracil versus sorafenib, for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with macroscopic vascular invasion without extra-hepatic spread: A prospective cohort study.

Masahito Nakano, Takashi Niizeki, Hiroaki Nagamatsu, Masatoshi Tanaka, Ryoko Kuromatsu, Manabu Satani, Shusuke Okamura, Hideki Iwamoto, Shigeo Shimose, Tomotake Shirono and 4 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Masahito NakanoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Takashi NiizekiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Hiroaki NagamatsuDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Yame General Hospital, Yame, Fukuoka 834-0034, Japan.
Masatoshi TanakaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Yokokura Hospital, Miyama, Fukuoka 839-0295, Japan.
Ryoko KuromatsuDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Manabu SataniDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Shusuke OkamuraDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Hideki IwamotoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Shigeo ShimoseDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Tomotake ShironoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Yu NodaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Hironori KogaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Takuji TorimuraDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan.
Kurume Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan
Kurume University · JPShinKokura Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although sorafenib and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) have been proven to improve prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with macroscopic vascular invasion (MVI), the most appropriate approach remains unclear. The present multicenter, non-randomized, prospective cohort study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of HAIC and sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC and MVI, without extra-hepatic spread (EHS) and Child-Pugh class A disease. The present study was performed between April 2008 and March 2014, and 64 HCC patients with MVI, without EHS and Child-Pugh class A disease were registered. Of these patients, 44 were treated with HAIC and 20 with sorafenib. HAIC involved cisplatin (50 mg fine powder in 5-10 ml lipiodol) and a continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (FU) (1,500 mg/5 days), which is referred to as new 5-FU and cisplatin therapy (NFP). The primary outcome was progression-free survival, and the secondary outcome was overall survival (OS). Clinical factors influencing OS and the therapeutic effect were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. There were no differences in clinical factors between the two groups. The median progression-free survival was 5.1 and 9.5 months in the sorafenib and NFP groups, respectively (P=0.001). The complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) rates were 10 and 71% in the sorafenib and NFP groups, respectively (P<0.001). The median OS in the sorafenib and NFP groups was 13.2 and 30.4 months, respectively (P=0.013). Multivariate analysis revealed that the independent predictors of survival were Child-Pugh score (5, P=0.022, 95% CI, 0.191-0.892), grade of portal vein invasion (brunch, P=0.009, 95% CI, 0.220-0.752), and therapeutic effect (CR or PR, P<0.001, 95% CI, 0.220-0.752), and the independent predictor of therapeutic effect was therapeutic regimen (NFP, P<0.001, 95% CI, 0.006-0.199). NFP should be the first choice for patients with advanced HCC and MVI, without EHS and Child-Pugh A disease.

Indexed as

advanced hepatocellular carcinomahepatic arterial infusion therapymacroscopic vascular invasionsorafenib

Identifiers

PMID29285366
PMCPMC5740831
OpenAlexW2760867461

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.