ArticlePloS one2018
The prognostic analysis of different metastatic patterns in advanced liver cancer patients: A population based analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hypoxia signaling in hepatocellular carcinoma: Challenges and therapeutic opportunities.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2023Review
- Article
- Liver cancer incidence and mortality: Disparities based on age, ethnicity, health and nutrition, molecular factors, and geography.Cancer health disparities · 2020Article
- ERK/AKT Inactivation and Apoptosis Induction Associate With Quetiapine-inhibited Cell Survival and Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognostic impact of different distant metastases pattern in liver cancer is unexplored still now. The aim of this study is to analyze the metastasis patterns and prognosis differences for patients with stage IV liver cancers.
methodsA SEER analysis was performed. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to further analyze survival outcome and other prognostic factors.
resultsA total of 37526 eligible cases were retrieved in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Among these patients, stage of IV liver cancer accounted for 14.80% (5555/37526) at initial diagnosis. Patients who suffered bone, brain or lung metastasis occupied 55.61% (3089/5555). Comparing with other two single metastases, the patients with brain metastasis exhibited worst overall survival whose mean of survival was 4.758 months. Multivariate analysis with Cox hazard regression model showed that metastatic site was an independent prognostic factor of overall survival and cancer-specific survival in patients with single metastasis (P<0.05). The results of univariate analysis showed that metastatic pattern was significantly correlated with overall survival (P = 0.038) and cancer-specific survival (P = 0.035) of patients with two sites.
conclusionsLung was the most common site of single metastasis for liver cancers. Patients with bone metastasis had best survival outcome comparing with other two distant metastases. Patients with two metastatic sites, where one of them is the lung tends to have a slight trend to a worse outcome.
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.