Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31877664›Full record

ReviewCancers2019

Efficacy of Regorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Antonio Facciorusso, Mohamed A Abd El Aziz, Rodolfo Sacco

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Antonio FacciorussoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Section of Gastroenterology, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.
Mohamed A Abd El AzizDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.
Rodolfo SaccoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Section of Gastroenterology, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regorafenib showed promising results as a second-line agent after sorafenib failure in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in hepatocarcinoma patients. A computerized bibliographic search was performed on the main databases. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, tumor response, and the adverse events rate. Outcomes were pooled through a random-effects model and summary estimates were expressed in terms of median and 95% confidence interval or rates, as appropriate. One randomized-controlled trial and seven non-randomized studies with 809 patients were included. The great majority of recruited patients were in Child-Pugh A and ECOG 0 stage. Median overall survival was 11.08 months (9.46-12.71) and sensitivity analyses confirmed this finding, with a median survival ranging from 10.2 to 13.8 months. Duration of regorafenib therapy was 3.58 months, whereas median progression-free survival was 3.24 months (2.68-3.86). The pooled objective response rate was 10.1% (7.8%-12.5%) while the disease control rate was 65.5% (61.3%-69.7%) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I

Indexed as

advancedcirrhosishepatocarcinomaliver cancerSorafenib

Identifiers

PMID31877664
PMCPMC7017079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.