ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2020
Primary Liver Cancer: An NCDB Analysis of Overall Survival and Margins After Hepatectomy.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2020. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative mortality and survival after lymph node excision in hepatocellular carcinoma: a national cancer database propensity score-matched cohort study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Correlation between clinical and pathological nodal status in hepatocellular carcinoma: identifying risk factors for lymph node metastasis via the national cancer database.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Surgical Aspects of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.Cancers · 2022Review
- Systematic Elucidation of the Potential Mechanisms of Core Chinese Materia Medicas in Treating Liver Cancer Based on Network Pharmacology.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) constitute the majority of primary liver cancers. This retrospective review aimed to determine whether site of care is a significant predictor of patient outcome after hepatectomy as measured by overall survival, hazard ratios (HRs), and resection margin status.
methodsData regarding patients with a new diagnosis of ICC and HCC who underwent hepatectomy were analyzed from the national cancer database. The patients were divided into two cohorts: those receiving treatment at academic cancer centers (ACCs) and those receiving treatment at community cancer centers (CCCs). The study adjusted for confounding variables and selection bias using propensity score matching. Median overall survival (months), hazard ratios, and resection margin status (R0, R1/R2, unknown) were examined.
resultsThe inclusion criteria were met by 10,463 patients. After propensity matching, 5600 patients remained, with half receiving treatment at ACCs and half at CCCs. Median overall survival from the date of diagnosis for patients undergoing hepatectomy was longer at ACCs than at CCCs (28.3 vs 24.8 months; p < 0.001). Additionally, multivariable Cox proportional hazards models showed that treatment at CCCs was associated with poorer survival than treatment at ACCs (HR, 1.226; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.142-1.316; p < 0.0001). Treatment facility designation also was a predictive indicator of resection margin status, with patients at CCCs exhibiting higher odds of R1/R2 resections (odds ratio [OR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.19-1.67; p < 0.0001).
conclusionHepatectomy for ICC and HCC performed at ACCs was associated with improved outcomes compared with CCCs. Centralization of care to ACCs may lead to improved patient outcomes.
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.