Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30084757›Full record

ArticleExperimental and clinical transplantation : official journal of the Middle East Society for Organ Transplantation2020

Accuracy of Milan, University of California San Francisco, and Up-To-7 Criteria in Predicting Tumor Recurrence Following Deceased-Donor Liver Transplant in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Behnam Saberi, Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang, Michelle Ma, Tokunbo Ajayi, Amy Kim, Harry Luu, Neha Jakhete, Aliaksei Pustavoitau, Robert A Anders, Christos Georgiades and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and clinical transplantation : official journal of the Middle East Society for Organ Transplantation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Nutritional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021
    Review
  3. 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

15 authors.

Behnam SaberiFrom the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology-Transplant Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang
Michelle Ma
Tokunbo Ajayi
Amy Kim
Harry Luu
Neha Jakhete
Aliaksei Pustavoitau
Robert A Anders
Christos Georgiades
Ihab Kamel
Shane Ottmann
Benjamin Philosophe
Andrew M Cameron
Ahmet Gurakar

Funding

Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR001079 · NCATS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2013 to 2017
$60.1M
Translational Research Enhancement CoreP30DK089502 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DONOWITZ, MARK · 2011 to 2020
$12.0M
Pathway Specific Functional Biomarkers for the Early Detection of Liver CancerU01CA230690 · NCI · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MISHRA, LOPA, SHETTY, KIRTI · 2018 to 2022
$3.4M
Improved early prognostic algorithm for hepatocellulcar carcinomaK08CA237624 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI KIM, AMY K · 2020 to 2024
$1.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001079NCI NIH HHS K08 CA237624NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230690NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK089502
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to investigate the accuracy of the Milan, University of California San Francisco, and Up-to-7 criteria in predicting tumor recurrence after liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma. MATERIALS AND

methodsFor this study, 165 patients with deceased-donor liver transplant for hepatocellular carcinoma were evaluated. The Milan, University of California San Francisco, and Up-to-7 criteria were calculated based on explant pathology.

resultsTumor recurrence rate after liver transplant was 14.6%. Of 165 patients, 115 (70%) were within Milan, 131 (79%) were within University of California San Francisco, and 135 (82%) were within Up-to-7 criteria. The odds ratio of tumor recurrence in patients outside versus within criteria for Milan, University of California San Francisco, and Up-to-7 was 3.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-9.1; P = .005), 7.5 (95% confidence interval, 2.5-19.3; P < .001), and 7.5 (95% confidence interval, 2.9-19.6; P < .001) times higher, respectively. The sensitivity of being outside of Milan in predicting tumor recurrence was comparable to University of California San Francisco and Up-to-7 criteria (56.5%, 56.5%, and 52.2%, respectively). Specificity was highest in Up-to-7 (87.3%) versus 85.2% for University of California San Francisco and 73.9% for Milan criteria. The area under the curve for Milan, University of California San Francisco, and Up-to-7 criteria was 0.63, 0.65, and 0.63.

conclusionsApplication of standard criteria has significantly improved prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence. However, these criteria are inadequate, supporting the importance of other factors, including tumor biology. Research is ongoing in discovering novel biomarkers as predictors of tumor recurrence.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAdultAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleHumansLiver NeoplasmsLiver TransplantationMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID30084757
PMCPMC6435435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.