ArticleMedicine2018
Clinicopathological features and differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in extrahepatic metastases.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns and Clinicopathological Features of Histologically Proven Metastases in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cureus · 2024Article
- Unpredictable Metastasis in the Head and Neck Region: A Diagnostic Immunohistochemical Challenge.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Chest wall mass as a sign of ignored hepatocellular carcinoma in an alcoholic cirrhotic patient: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Sonographic features of thoracoabdominal wall metastases of liver cancer after liver transplantation.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Development and validation of an ensemble machine-learning model for predicting early mortality among patients with bone metastases of hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Potential biomarkers for the early detection of bone metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Occurrence-regression-recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma without any intervention: A case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Update on Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Brief Review from Pathologist Standpoint.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2020Review
- High-throughput sequencing-based analysis of gene expression of hepatitis B virus infection-associated human hepatocellular carcinoma.Oncology letters · 2020Article
- A Rare Case of Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma Masquerading as a Forehead Hematoma.Case reports in gastrointestinal medicine · 2020Article
- Diagnostic value of glypican-3, arginase-1 and hepatocyte paraffin antigen -1 in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- Hemorrhagic Brain Metastasis as an Initial Presentation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in a Patient With Alcohol-Related Liver Cirrhosis: A Case Report and Review of Literature.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extrahepatic metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may cause a diagnostic problem. All 195 cases of histologic and immunostained sections were reviewed retrospectively in one center. The expression of arginase-1 (Arg-1), hepatocyte paraffin-1 (HepPar-1), glypican-3 (GPC-3), and α-Fetoprotein (AFP) was evaluated. Eighty cases of metastatic tumors of the liver were also collected to verify their effectiveness. Totally 151 cases had previous history of HCC, in whom 49 had history of liver transplantation. Forty-four cases were diagnosed as metastatic HCC at initial presentation. The most common extrahepatic metastatic sites were bone (57%), followed by lung, lymph node, etc. Around 19 cases were positive for 1 marker, 22 were positive for 2 markers, 95 were positive for 3 markers, and 59 were positive for 4 markers. With the number of antibody increased in the panel, the negative cases decreased. The sensitivity of ARG, GPC-3, HepPar-1, and AFP was 82.6%, 89.2%, 83.6% and 53.8%, and the specificity was 98.3%, 94.8%, 96.2% and 100%, respectively. These data suggest that the panel of ARG-1, GPC-3, HepPar-1 and AFP has a high sensitivity and specificity to differentiate HCC from non-HCC. This study indicated that HCC should be considered when diagnosing metastasis of unclear origin. It is recommended to use the panel of ARG-1, GPC-3, HepPar-1 and AFP to differentiate HCC from non-HCC in extrahepatic metastasis, because of their sensitivity and specificity, especially in poorly differentiated lesions.
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.