Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31138726›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2019

An Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital Microvascular Invasion Scoring System in Predicting Prognosis of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Microvascular Invasion After R0 Liver Resection: A Large-Scale, Multicenter Study.

Xiu-Ping Zhang, Kang Wang, Xu-Biao Wei, Le-Qun Li, Hui-Chuan Sun, Tian-Fu Wen, Zong-Tao Chai, Zhen-Hua Chen, Jie Shi, Wei-Xing Guo and 5 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Competing risk analysis of surgical resectionTranslational cancer research · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Advances in post-operative prognostic models for hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2023
    Review
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.

Xiu-Ping ZhangDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Kang WangDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Xu-Biao WeiDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Le-Qun LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Tumour Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, People's Republic of China.
Hui-Chuan SunKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Cancer Invasion, Ministry of Education, Fudan University, Liver Cancer Institute, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Tian-Fu WenDepartment of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, People's Republic of China.
Zong-Tao ChaiDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Zhen-Hua ChenDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Jie ShiDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wei-Xing GuoDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Dong XieKey Laboratory of Nutrition, Metabolism and Food Safety, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wen-Ming CongDepartments of Pathology, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Meng-Chao WuDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wan Yee LauDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Shu-Qun ChengDepartments of Hepatic Surgery VI, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China chengshuqun@aliyun.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6760-7470

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrovascular invasion (MVI) is associated with poor postoperative survival outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). An Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital (EHBH) MVI scoring system was established to predict prognosis in patients with HCC with MVI after R0 liver resection (LR) and to supplement the most commonly used classification systems. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with HCC with MVI who underwent R0 LR as an initial therapy were included. The EHBH-MVI score was developed from a retrospective cohort from 2003 to 2009 to form the training cohort. The variables associated with overall survival (OS) on univariate analysis were subsequently investigated using the log-rank test, and the EHBH-MVI score was developed using the Cox regression model. It was validated using an internal prospective cohort from 2011 to 2013 as well as three independent external validation cohorts.

resultsThere were 1,033 patients in the training cohort; 322 patients in the prospective internal validation cohort; and 493, 282, and 149 patients in the three external validation cohorts, respectively. The score was developed using the following factors: α-fetoprotein level, tumor encapsulation, tumor diameter, hepatitis B e antigen positivity, hepatitis B virus DNA load, tumor number, and gastric fundal/esophageal varicosity. The score differentiated two groups of patients (≤4, >4 points) with distinct long-term prognoses outcomes (median OS, 55.8 vs. 19.6 months;

conclusionThe EHBH-MVI scoring system was more accurate in predicting prognosis in patients with HCC with MVI after R0 LR than the other four commonly used staging systems. The score can be used to supplement these systems. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a major determinant of survival outcomes after curative liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Currently, there is no scoring system aiming to predict prognosis of patients with HCC and MVI after R0 liver resection (LR). Most of the widely used staging systems for HCC do not use MVI as an independent risk factor, and they cannot be used to predict the prognosis of patients with HCC and MVI after surgery. In this study, a new Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital (EHBH) MVI scoring system was established to predict prognosis of patients with HCC and MVI after R0 LR. Based on the results of this study, postoperative adjuvant therapy may be recommended for patients with HCC and MVI with an EHBH-MVI score >4. This score can be used to supplement the currently used HCC classifications to predict postoperative survival outcomes in patients with HCC and MVI.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularCohort StudiesFemaleHospitalsHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleNeoplasm InvasivenessPrognosisRetrospective StudiesHepatocellular carcinomaMicrovascular invasionR0 liver resectionScoring system

Identifiers

PMID31138726
PMCPMC6975940

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.