Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32769883›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy vs transcatheter arterial embolization for patients with huge unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

Wei-Lun Tsai, Wei-Chi Sun, Wen-Chi Chen, Chia-Ling Chiang, Huey-Shyan Lin, Huei-Lung Liang, Jin-Shiung Cheng

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Wei-Lun TsaiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung.
Wei-Chi SunDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung.
Wen-Chi ChenDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung.
Chia-Ling ChiangDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung.
Huey-Shyan LinSchool of Nursing, Fooyin University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Huei-Lung LiangShool of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei.
Jin-Shiung ChengDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung.
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWNational Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWFooyin University · TWKaohsiung Veterans General Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For the treatment of huge unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) or transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) generally had poor effects and high complication rates. Our previous study found that Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is a safe procedure and provides better survival than symptomatic treatment for the patients with huge unresectable HCC. The aim of the study is to compare the effect of HAIC vs TAE in patients with huge unresectable HCC.Since 2000 to 2005, patients with huge (size > 8 cm) unresectable HCC were enrolled. Twenty-six patients received HAIC and 25 patients received TAE. Each patient in the HAIC group received 2.5 + 1.4 (range: 1-6) courses of HAIC and in the TAE group received 1.8 + 1.2 (range: 1-5) courses of TAE. Baseline characteristics and survival were compared between the HAIC and TAE group.The HAIC group and the TAE group were similar in baseline characteristics and tumor stages. The overall survival rates at 1 and 2 years were 42% and 31% in the HAIC group and 28% and 24% in the TAE group. The patients in the HAIC group had higher overall survival than the TAE group (P = .077). Cox-regression multivariate analysis revealed that HAIC is the significant factor associated with overall survival (relative risk: 0.461, 95% confidence interval: 0.218-0.852, P = .027). No patients died of the complications of HAIC but three patients (12%) died of the complications of TAE.In conclusion, HAIC is a safe procedure and provides better survival than TAE for patients with huge unresectable HCCs.

Indexed as

AgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, HepatocellularEmbolization, TherapeuticFemaleHepatic ArteryHumansInfusions, Intra-ArterialLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingProportional Hazards ModelsRegression AnalysisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID32769883
PMCPMC7593048
OpenAlexW3047620039

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.