Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35086147›Full record

ArticleBJS open2022

Long-term oncological prognosis after curative-intent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in the young versus the elderly: multicentre propensity score-matching study.

Jia-Le Pu, Zhong Chen, Lan-Qing Yao, Ji-Ye Feng, Yong-Kang Diao, Ming-Cheng Guan, Ju-Dong Li, Zheng-Liang Chen, Ya-Hao Zhou, Hong Wang and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Curative Analysis of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization Combined with Radiofrequency Ablation.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2022
    Article
  10. 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

20 authors.

Jia-Le PuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6984-3290
Zhong ChenDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China.
Lan-Qing YaoDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Ji-Ye FengDepartment of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
Yong-Kang DiaoDepartment of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Minimal Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Ming-Cheng GuanDepartment of Medical Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Soochow, Jiangsu, China.
Ju-Dong LiDepartment of Pancreatic-biliary Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University (Naval Medical University), Shanghai, China.
Zheng-Liang ChenDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Ya-Hao ZhouDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Pu'er People's Hospital, Pu'er, Yunnan, China.
Hong WangDepartment of General Surgery, Liuyang People's Hospital, Liuyang, Hunan, China.
Wei-Min GuThe First Department of General Surgery, The Fourth Hospital of Harbin, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Jie LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Fuyang People's Hospital, Fuyang, Anhui, China.
Chao LiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Ming-Da WangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Hong ZhuDepartment of Medical Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Soochow, Jiangsu, China.
Ying-Jian LiangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Feng ShenDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Timothy M PawlikDepartment of Surgery, Ohio State University, Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Wan Yee LauDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Tian YangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0575-0698

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common malignancy in the elderly worldwide, but it is also common among younger individuals in areas with endemic hepatitis B virus infection. The differences in long-term oncological prognosis of young versus elderly patients after R0 liver resection for HCC were explored in this study.

methodsUsing a Chinese multicentre database, consecutive patients who underwent R0 liver resection for HCC between 2007 and 2019 were analysed retrospectively. After excluding middle-aged (36-69 years old) patients, overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and recurrence were compared between young (35 years or younger) and elderly (70 years or older) patients using propensity score matching (PSM).

resultsAmong 531 enrolled patients, there were 192 (36.2 per cent) and 339 (63.8 per cent) patients categorized as young and elderly respectively. PSM created 140 pairs of matched patients. In the PSM cohort, 5-year OS was comparable for young versus elderly patients (51.7 versus 52.3 per cent, P = 0.533). Young patients, however, had a higher 5-year cumulative recurrence rate (62.1 versus 51.6 per cent, P = 0.011) and a worse 5-year CSS rate (54.0 versus 64.3 per cent, P = 0.034) than elderly patients. On multivariable Cox regression analyses, young patient age remained independently associated with an increased recurrence rate (hazard ratio 1.62, P = 0.016) and a decreased CSS rate (hazard ratio 1.69, P = 0.021) compared with older age.

conclusionFollowing R0 liver resection for HCC, younger patients were at a higher risk of recurrence, and elderly patients had a better CSS rate. Thus, enhanced surveillance for HCC recurrence should be implemented for young patients.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsAdultAgedDisease-Free SurvivalHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisPropensity ScoreRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35086147
PMCPMC8794648

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.