Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30323628›Full record

ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2018

Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of overall survival and recurrence-free survival.

Andrea Casadei Gardini, Giorgia Marisi, Matteo Canale, Francesco Giuseppe Foschi, Gabriele Donati, Giorgio Ercolani, Martina Valgiusti, Alessandro Passardi, Giovanni Luca Frassineti, Emanuela Scarpi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for the management of hepatocarcinoma patients (2023).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea Casadei GardiniDepartment of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy, andrea.casadei@irst.emr.it.
Giorgia MarisiBiosciences Laboratory, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Matteo CanaleBiosciences Laboratory, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Francesco Giuseppe FoschiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Degli Infermi Hospital, Faenza, Italy.
Gabriele DonatiInternal Medicine, Infermi Hospital, AUSL Romagna, Rimini, Italy.
Giorgio ErcolaniDepartment of General Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Forlì, Italy.
Martina ValgiustiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy, andrea.casadei@irst.emr.it.
Alessandro PassardiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy, andrea.casadei@irst.emr.it.
Giovanni Luca FrassinetiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy, andrea.casadei@irst.emr.it.
Emanuela ScarpiUnit of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori · ITOspedale G.B. Morgagni - L.Pierantoni · ITOspedale Infermi di Rimini · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aims: So far, no randomized trial or meta-analysis has been conducted on overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) factors in patients treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) alone. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate prognostic factors of OS and RFS in patients treated with RFA. Methods: A primary analysis was planned to evaluate the clinical prognostic factor of OS. RFS was the secondary aim. Thirty-four studies published from 2003 to 2017 were analyzed. They included 11,216 hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Results: The results showed that Child-Pugh B vs Child-Pugh A (HR =2.32; 95% CI: 2.201-2.69; Conclusion: Our meta-analysis highlighted that the maximum benefit of RFA in terms of OS and RFS is reached in the presence of Child-Pugh A, albumin-bilirubin score 1, single-nodule tumor sized <2 cm, and alpha-fetoprotein <20 ng/mL.

Indexed as

ALBI scorealpha-fetoproteinchilpughimmune-inflammation indexmarkerneutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratioNLRoutcomeplatelet-lymphocyte ratioradiofrequency

Identifiers

PMID30323628
PMCPMC6178942
OpenAlexW2894699806

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.