ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2020
Critical review of HCC imaging in the multidisciplinary setting: treatment allocation and evaluation of response.
Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response evaluation to systemic therapy in HCC: Current challenges and future perspectives.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Review
- Harnessing nanoparticles for reshaping tumor immune microenvironment of hepatocellular carcinoma.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Understanding the role of radiologists in complex treatment decisions for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Review
- Ethyl Acetate Fraction ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
- LI-RADS Version 2018 Treatment Response Algorithm: Diagnostic Performance after Transarterial Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Korean journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Comparison of PET imaging of activated fibroblasts andEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Chemoembolization Plus Microwave Ablation vs Chemoembolization Alone in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Beyond the Milan Criteria: A Propensity Scoring Matching Study.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Article
- Intraarterial Lidocaine Administration for Pain Control by Water-in-Oil Technique in Transarterial Chemoembolization: in vivo and Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Article
- SPRY4-AS1, A Novel Enhancer RNA, Is a Potential Novel Prognostic Biomarker and Therapeutic Target for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- 2023 Update of Indian National Association for Study of the Liver Consensus on Management of Intermediate and Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Puri III Recommendations.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyReview
- Development of a Predictive Immune-Related Gene Signature Associated With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patient Prognosis.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Imaging has not only an established role in screening and diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic liver inflammatory diseases, but also a crucial importance for patient stratification and treatment allocation, as well as for assessing treatment response. In the setting of increasing therapeutic options for HCC, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system still remains the most appropriate way to select candidate cohorts for best treatments. This classification takes into account the imaging information on tumor burden and extension, liver function, and cancer-related symptoms, stratifying patients in five risk categories (Stages 0, A, B, C and D) associated with different treatment options. Still now, there are no clear roles for biomarkers use in treatment allocation. The increasing use of locoregional non-surgical therapies in the different stages is highly dependent on reliable evaluation of treatment response, in particular when they are used with curative intention or for downstaging at liver transplantation re-assessment. Moreover, objective response (OR) has emerged as an important imaging biomarker, providing information on tumor biology, which can contribute for further prognostic assessment. Current guidelines for OR assessment recommend only the measurement of viable tumor according to mRECIST criteria, with further classification into complete response, partial response, stable disease or progressive disease. Either computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance (MR) imaging can be used for this purpose, and the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) committee has recently provided some guidance for reporting after locoregional therapies. Nevertheless, imaging pitfalls resulting from treatment-related changes can impact with the correct evaluation of treatment response, especially after transarterial radioembolization (TARE). Volume criteria and emerging imaging techniques might also contribute for a better refinement in the assessment of treatment response and monitoring. As the role of imaging deeply expands in the multidisciplinary assessment of HCC, our main objective in this review is to discuss state-of-the-art decision-making aspects for treatment allocation and provide guidance for treatment response evaluation.
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.