Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33893539›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2021

Treatment efficacy by hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy vs. sorafenib after liver-directed concurrent chemoradiotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Sojung Han, Hye Jin Choi, Seung-Hoon Beom, Hye Rim Kim, Hyein Lee, Jae Seung Lee, Hye Won Lee, Jun Yong Park, Seung Up Kim, Do Young Kim and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sojung HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8956-5339
Hye Jin ChoiDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5917-1400
Seung-Hoon BeomDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7036-3753
Hye Rim KimBiostatistics Collaboration Unit, Department of Biomedical Systems Informatics, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9604-7214
Hyein LeeYonsei Liver Center, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6664-8366
Jae Seung LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2371-0967
Hye Won LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3552-3560
Jun Yong ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6324-2224
Seung Up KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9658-8050
Do Young KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8327-3439
Sang Hoon AhnDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3629-4624
Kwang-Hyub HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3960-6539
Jinsil SeongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1794-5951
Jong Yun WonDepartment of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8237-5628
Beom Kyung KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea. beomkkim@yuhs.ac.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5363-2496
Yonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe compared the clinical efficacies of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) vs. sorafenib as sequential maintenance therapy following liver-directed concurrent chemoradiotherapy (LD-CCRT) for locally advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

methodsPatients undergoing HAIC with 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (HAIC-maintain group, n = 151) or sorafenib (Sorafenib-maintain group, n = 37) after LD-CCRT were consecutively enrolled. The study endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment response rates.

resultsThe median OS among HAIC-maintain and Sorafenib-maintain groups were 15.9 and 24.3 months (p = 0.287), whereas the median PFS were 8.1 and 9.1 months (p = 0.651), respectively. During the planned treatments, the radiological objective response rate (54.3% vs. 64.9%; p = 0.246), and conversion rate to surgical resection or liver transplantation after successful down-staging (15.9% vs. 18.9%; p = 0.657) were comparable between the HAIC-maintain and Sorafenib-maintain groups. Similar results were found after the inverse probability of treatment weighting and propensity score-matching analyses. Regarding treatment-related adverse events, the HAIC-maintain group showed worse profiles in terms of leukopenia (all grades [p = 0.001] and grades 3 or 4 [p = 0.041]) and hypoalbuminemia (p = 0.001) than the Sorafenib-maintain group.

conclusionsThe overall clinical efficacies between the sequential treatment of HAIC vs. sorafenib after LD-CCRT were comparable for locally advanced HCC.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, HepatocellularChemoradiotherapyCisplatinFemaleFluorouracilFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfusions, Intra-ArterialLiver NeoplasmsMaintenance ChemotherapyMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSorafenibCisplatinFluorouracilSorafenibConcurrent chemoradiotherapyHepatic arterial infusion chemotherapyHepatocellular carcinomaMaintenanceSorafenib

Identifiers

PMID33893539
PMCPMC11801955
OpenAlexW3156691293

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.