SynthesisJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2020
Clinical role of combining alpha-fetoprotein and lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of alpha-fetoprotein for hepatocellular carcinoma: Evidence from literature and an original study.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical role of combining alpha-fetoprotein and lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of alpha-fetoprotein for hepatocellular carcinoma: Evidence from literature and an original study.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2020Pooled it
- Development and Validation of a Lectin-independent Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method for Serum Glycosylated Alpha-fetoprotein Analysis and Comparison with a Liquid-phase Binding Assay.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- The Application of Nanomaterials in the Detection of Liver Cancer Biomarkers.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- New insights into biomarkers and risk stratification to predict hepatocellular cancer.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Review
- Review
- Current and Emerging Tools for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance.Hepatology communications · 2021Review
- Review
- Research and discussion on the evaluation scheme of reagent lot-to-lot differences in 16 chemiluminescence analytes, established by the EP26-A guidelines of the CLSI.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2021Article
- FUT8 and Protein Core Fucosylation in Tumours: From Diagnosis to Treatment.Journal of Cancer · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the clinical diagnostic efficacy of the combination of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of AFP/total AFP (AFP-L3%) for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsA comprehensive and systemic literature search was executed in Web of Science, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library websites. Then, the related articles were reviewed and the quality of included studies was evaluated with the QUADAS tool. Further, serum samples were collected from 49 HCC patients, 52 cirrhosis patients, 47 hepatitis patients, and 48 healthy controls and these samples were tested for AFP and AFP-L3% levels.
resultsA total of 16 eligible articles were included in our meta-analysis. The overall sensitivity (SEN) of AFP + AFP-L3% was higher than that of AFP or AFP-L3 alone; the overall specificity (SPE) of AFP + AFP-L3% was lower than that of AFP or AFP-L3 alone. In the original study, the related statistics were, respectively, SEN = 0.592 and SPE = 0.918 for AFP; SEN = 0.367 and SPE = 1.000 for AFP-L3%; and SEN = 0.592 and SPE = 0.918 for the combination.
conclusionThe results of meta-analysis indicate there is a beneficial effect of using the unity of AFP and AFP-L3% for HCC diagnosing. However, in the original study, just for the results of sensitivity and specificity, there is no significant difference between AFP alone and AFP + AFP-L3%.
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.