Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33618022›Full record

ArticleClinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association2022

Patient Preferences for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance Parameters.

Sean A Woolen, Amit G Singal, Matthew S Davenport, Jonathan P Troost, Shokoufeh Khalatbari, Sukul Mittal, Sehar Siddiqui, Austin Fobar, Jason Morris, Mobolaji Odewole and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Financial Burden of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Patients With Cirrhosis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2024
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of a Mailed Outreach Strategy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Practice changing RCT design and rationale: Abbreviated MRI plus AFPJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Sean A WoolenDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Amit G SingalDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; North American Liver Cancer Consortium.
Matthew S DavenportDepartment of Radiology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Jonathan P TroostMichigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Shokoufeh KhalatbariMichigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Sukul MittalDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Sehar SiddiquiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Austin FobarDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Jason MorrisCenter for Liver Disease, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Mobolaji OdewoleDivision of Digestive and Liver Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Elliot B TapperDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Anjana PillaiNorth American Liver Cancer Consortium; Center for Liver Disease, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Neehar D ParikhNorth American Liver Cancer Consortium; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: ndparikh@med.umich.edu.

Funding

Multilevel factors for racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in prognosis of hepatocellular carcinomaR01MD012565 · NIMHD · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI SINGAL, AMIT, YOPP, ADAM · 2018 to 2022
$4.3M
Training Program in Gastrointestinal EpidemiologyT32DK062708 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Peter D.R. Higgins, Elliot Tapper · 2003 to 2026
$3.9M
Precision Risk Stratification and Screening for HCC among Patients with Cirrhosis in the United StatesU01CA230694 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI SINGAL, AMIT · 2018 to 2022
$3.5M
NOVEL STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE LIVER CANCER SURVEILLANCE UPTAKE AND EARLY DETECTIONU01CA230669 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI LOK, ANNA S.F., SU, GRACE L. · 2018 to 2022
$3.3M
Harms of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Patients with CirrhosisR01CA212008 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI SINGAL, AMIT · 2017 to 2022
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA212008NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230669NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230694NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK062708NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD012565
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsProfessional societies recommend abdominal ultrasound (US) with or without alpha fetoprotein (AFP) for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) surveillance; however, there are several emerging surveillance modalities, including abbreviated MRI and blood-based biomarker panels. Most studies have focused on provider perspectives for surveillance logistics, but few have assessed patient preferences. We aimed to measure preferences among patients with cirrhosis regarding HCC surveillance modalities.

methodsWe conducted a choice-based conjoint survey to patients with cirrhosis at four institutions. Participants were provided 15 scenarios in which they were asked to choose surveillance modalities based on five test attributes: benefits, i.e. sensitivity for early HCC (range: 35-95%), physical harm, i.e. false positives requiring additional testing (range: 10-40%), financial harm, i.e. out-of-pocket costs (range: $10-100), test logistics and convenience, i.e. duration of testing (range: 10-60 min). Hierarchical Bayes discrete choice conjoint analysis was used to derive attribute importance, and preference shares were determined by simulation.

resultsIn total 91% (182/199) of approached patients consented to participate in the study and 98% (n=179) successfully completed the survey. Surveillance benefits (importance: 51.3%, 95%CI: 49.0-53.4%) were valued more than risk of physical harm (importance: 7.6%, 95%CI 7.0-8.2%), financial harm (importance: 15.2%, 95%CI 14.0-16.3%), convenience (importance: 9.3%, 95%CI 8.5-10.1%) and test logistics (importance: 16.7%, 95%CI 15.4-18.1%). Based on simulations including all possible tests, patients preferred abbreviated MRI (29.0%), MRI (23.3%), or novel blood-based biomarkers (20.9%) to ultrasound alone (3.4%) or with AFP (8.8%).

conclusionsPatients with cirrhosis prioritize early HCC detection over potential surveillance-related harms or inconvenience.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver Neoplasmsalpha-FetoproteinsBayes TheoremHumansLiver CirrhosisPatient Preferencealpha-FetoproteinsHarmsHCCScreeningSensitivity

Identifiers

PMID33618022
PMCPMC9150784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.