Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36737488›Full record

SynthesisClinical and experimental medicine2023

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of selective internal radiotherapy and sorafenib alone or combined for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Hao Zeng, Chengyuan Zhou, Xiaojing Chen, Lanxin Hu, Ke Su, Lu Guo, Yunwei Han

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Sorafenib with or without co-interventions for hepatocellular carcinoma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hao Zeng *Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9609-183X
Chengyuan Zhou *Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5739-8222
Xiaojing ChenDepartment of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-3103
Lanxin HuDepartment of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3662-3827
Ke SuDepartment of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7948-6335
Lu GuoDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Yunwei HanDepartment of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China. hanyunwei@swmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8330-0444
Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University · CNSouthwest Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) is a developing technique and its efficacy and modality of application in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still controversial. This network meta-analysis aims to determine whether the efficacy and safety of SIRT alone and in combination are superior to that of sorafenib.

methodsFour databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched before August 2022. Cochrane Randomized Trial Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality. The outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs).

resultsA total of 9 eligible trials involving 1954 patients were included, and SIRT ranked first among the three treatment modalities in terms of both OS (probability, 52.3%) and PFS (probability, 68.6%). The combination of SIRT and sorafenib did not improve OS or PFS in patients with HCC. Although the combination of SIRT and sorafenib did not raise the risk of grade 3 or higher AEs, it may have introduced more AEs than either alone.

conclusionsSIRT alone was found to be superior to sorafenib and the combination of the two in improving OS or PFS in patients with non-surgical HCC, especially in patients with combined portal vein tumor thrombus. The AEs induced by SIRT were different from those of sorafenib, but the overall toxicity was manageable, the combination of the two may cause an increase in the types of AEs that occur.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsBayes TheoremHumansSorafenibSorafenibLiver cancerNetwork meta-analysisNon-surgical treatmentsTransarterial radioembolizationYttrium-90

Identifiers

PMID36737488
PMCPMC10543878
OpenAlexW4319072944

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.