Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35302279›Full record

ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2022

Clinical usefulness of geriatric assessment in elderly patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma receiving sorafenib or lenvatinib therapy.

Shuhei Sekiguchi, Kaoru Tsuchiya, Yutaka Yasui, Kento Inada, Sakura Kirino, Koji Yamashita, Yuka Hayakawa, Leona Osawa, Mayu Higuchi, Kenta Takaura and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Shuhei SekiguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-5984-1064
Kaoru TsuchiyaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Yutaka YasuiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Kento InadaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Sakura KirinoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Koji YamashitaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Yuka HayakawaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Leona OsawaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Mayu HiguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Kenta TakauraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Chiaki MaeyashikiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Shun KanekoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Nobuharu TamakiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Hiroyuki NakanishiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Jun ItakuraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Yuka TakahashiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Yasuhiro AsahinaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical Dental University, Bunkyo-Ku, Japan.
Ryuichi OkamotoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tokyo Medical Dental University, Bunkyo-Ku, Japan.
Masayuki KurosakiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Namiki IzumiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Musashino-shi, Japan.
Musashino Red Cross Hospital · JPTokyo Medical and Dental University · JPUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic strategies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) in geriatric patients are important for real-world practice. However, there remain no established biomarkers or therapeutic strategies regarding the best second-line agent after atezolizumab plus bevacizumab therapy.

aimIn this study, we investigated the usefulness of modified Geriatric 8 (mG8) score in examining elderly patients (≥75 years old) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC) using sorafenib or lenvatinib as first-line therapy. METHODS AND

resultsThis study assessed 101 elderly patients with u-HCC for their mG8 score (excluding elements of age from 8 items) and classified them into 2 groups according to their mG8 score: ≥11 as the high-score group and ≤ 10 as the low-score group. Among those taking sorafenib, no significant differences were noted in overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) between low and high mG8 score groups. Only modified albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade (2b/3 vs. 1/2a: HR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.69; p = .0029) was significantly associated with OS. Among those taking lenvatinib, patients with a high mG8 score (n = 26) had longer survival than those with a low mG8 score (n = 10) (20.0 months vs. 7.7 months: HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.89; p = .029). Intrahepatic tumor volume (<50% vs. ≥50%: HR 16.7; 95% CI, 1.71-163; p = .016) and α-fetoprotein (AFP) (<400 vs. ≥400: HR 3.38; 95% CI 0.84-19.7; p = .031) remained significant factors independently associated with OS.

conclusionsThe mG8 score may contribute to making a decision when considering either sorafenib or lenvatinib as a treatment option for u-HCC in elderly patients.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsAgedGeriatric AssessmentHumansPhenylurea CompoundsQuinolinesSorafenibAntineoplastic AgentslenvatinibPhenylurea CompoundsQuinolinesSorafenib1Geriatric 8 scorehepatocellular carcinoma 2lenvatinib 4sorafenib 3

Identifiers

PMID35302279
PMCPMC9675392
OpenAlexW4221130624

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.