ArticleWorld journal of hepatology2020
Comparison between hepatocellular carcinoma prognostic scores: A 10-year single-center experience and brief review of the current literature.
Article in World journal of hepatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hepatocellular Carcinoma at a Center of Clinical Excellence in Colombia: A Real-World Cohort Study of Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Trajectories, and Survival.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- Deep learning based on multiparametric MRI predicts early recurrence in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with solitary tumors ≤5 cm.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis among therapeutic modalities in ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma and identification of imaging predictors for survival.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Predictors of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Early Recurrence in Patients Treated with Surgical Resection or Ablation Treatment: A Single-Center Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- MicroRNAs Related to TACE Treatment Response: A Review of the Literature from a Radiological Point of View.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Hepatobiliary Scintigraphy and GlassDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Metformin Actions on the Liver: Protection Mechanisms Emerging in Hepatocytes and Immune Cells against NASH-Related HCC.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Physical Thermal Ablation Combined Sorafenib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2021Article
- Article
- Advanced Techniques in the Percutaneous Ablation of Liver Tumours.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Transarterial Radioembolization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Liver-Dominant Hepatic Colorectal Cancer Metastases, and Cholangiocarcinoma Using Yttrium90 Microspheres: Eight-Year Single-Center Real-Life Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Nomograms Incorporating the CNLC Staging System Predict the Outcome of Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Curative Resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the most common primitive liver malignancy. A relevant concern involves the lack of agreement on staging systems, prognostic scores, and treatment allocation algorithms.
aimTo compare the survival rates among already developed prognostic scores.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 140 patients with HCC diagnosed between February 2006 and November 2017. Patients were categorized according to 15 prognostic scoring systems and estimated median survivals were compared with those available from the current medical literature.
resultsThe median overall survival of the cohort of patients was 35 (17; 67) mo, and it was statistically different in relation to treatment choice, ultrasound surveillance, and serum alpha-fetoprotein. The Italian Liver Cancer (ITA.LI.CA) tumor staging system performed best in predicting survival according to stage allocation among all 15 evaluated prognostic scores. Using the ITA.LI.CA prognostic system, 28.6%, 40.7%, 22.1%, and 8.6% of patients fell within stages 0-1, 2-3, 4-5 and > 5 respectively. The median survival was 57.9 mo for stages 0-1, 43 mo for stages 2-3, 21.7 mo for stages 4-5, and 10.4 mo for stage > 5. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were respectively 95%, 65%, and 20%, for stages 0-1; 94.7%, 43.9% and 26.3% for stages 2-3; 71%, 25.8% and 16.1% for stages 4-5; and 50%, 16.7% and 8.3% for stage > 5. At the same time, although statistically significant in prognostic stratification, the most commonly used Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system showed one of the most relevant differences in median survival, especially for stages A and C, when compared to the medical literature. In fact, 10.7%, 59.3%, 27.1%, 1.4%, and 0% of patients were stratified into stages 0, A, B, C, and D respectively. The median survival was > 81.1 mo for stage 0, 44.9 mo for stage A, 21.3 mo for stage B, and 3.1 mo for stage C. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were respectively 86.7%, 60%, and 46.7% for stage 0; 91.6%, 50.6%, and 20.5% for stage A; 73.7%, 23.7% and 13.2% for stage B; and 2%, 0% and 0% for stage C.
conclusionSurvival analysis shows excellent prognostic ability of the ITA.LI.CA scoring system compared to other staging systems.
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.