Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32611383›Full record

ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2020

Follow-up schedule for initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after ablation based on risk classification.

Xuqi Sun, Lingling Li, Ning Lyu, Luwen Mu, Jinfa Lai, Ming Zhao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xuqi SunSun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Lingling LiZhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Ning LyuSun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Luwen MuDepartment of Vascular Interventional Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Jinfa LaiSun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, China.
Ming ZhaoSun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, 510060, China. zhaoming@sysucc.org.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1025-8895
Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo date, no standard follow-up guidelines exist regarding patients receiving ablation for initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to explore whether intensive follow-up could benefit these patients.

methodsWe reviewed the clinical data of patients who received complete ablation for initial HCC recurrence after curative treatments in our institution from January 2005 to June 2017. Risk factors for second recurrence of HCC were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. Patients were classified into low- and high-risk groups according to the outcome of the classification and regression model. The patients were further categorized into short- (< 3 months) and long-interval (3-6 months) follow-up subgroups based on their surveillance in the first 2 years after complete ablation for initial recurrence. The Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test was performed to compare the overall survival (OS) based on follow-up intervals in each risk group. We also validated our results by stratifying patients into subgroups with different numbers of risk factors and comparing the OS between patients with different follow-up intervals.

resultsA total of 361 patients were enrolled. The risk factors for secondary recurrence included the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage at initial recurrence and first recurrence-free survival after curative treatments for primary HCC (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Two risk groups (low and high) were identified. In both the low- and high-risk groups, the OS of patients was not associated with intervals of follow-up (p = 0.29 and 0.49). No significant difference was found in the rates of BCLC 0/A stage, tumor location or curative treatments for the second recurrence by different follow-up intervals in each risk group (p = 0.34 and 0.87; p = 0.69 and 0.97). The same tendency was found in subgroups with 0/1/2 risk factors for secondary recurrence during validation.

conclusionThe long-interval follow-up did not compromise the survival of patients with complete ablation for initial recurrent HCC.

Indexed as

AftercareAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalSurvival AnalysisAblationFollow-upHepatocellular carcinomaRecurrenceSurvival

Identifiers

PMID32611383
PMCPMC7329485
OpenAlexW3038319039

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.