Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37582759›Full record

SynthesisVirology journal2023

HCC prediction models in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving entecavir or tenofovir: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xiaolan Xu, Lushun Jiang, Yifan Zeng, Liya Pan, Zhuoqi Lou, Bing Ruan

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Virology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Guideline
  2. [APASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of chronic hepatitis B infection: a 2026 update].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors.

Xiaolan Xu *State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Lushun Jiang *State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Yifan ZengState Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Liya PanState Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Zhuoqi LouState Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Bing RuanState Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, National Medical Center for Infectious Diseases, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 79 Qingchun Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310000, China. ruanbing@zju.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOur study aimed to compare the predictive performance of different hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prediction models in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving entecavir or tenofovir, including discrimination, calibration, negative predictive value (NPV) in low-risk, and proportion of low-risk.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature research in PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science before January 13, 2022. The predictive performance was assessed by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration index, negative predictive value, and the proportion in low-risk. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses of discrimination and calibration were conducted. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to validate the stability of the results.

resultsWe identified ten prediction models in 23 studies. The pooled 3-, 5-, and 10-year AUROC varied from 0.72 to 0.84, 0.74 to 0.83, and 0.76 to 0.86, respectively. REAL-B, AASL-HCC, and HCC-RESCUE achieved the best discrimination. HCC-RESCUE, PAGE-B, and mPAGE-B overestimated HCC development, whereas mREACH-B, AASL-HCC, REAL-B, CAMD, CAGE-B, SAGE-B, and aMAP underestimated it. All models were able to identify people with a low risk of HCC accurately. HCC-RESCUE and aMAP recognized over half of the population as low-risk. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis showed similar results.

conclusionConsidering the predictive performance of all four aspects, we suggest that HCC-RESCUE was the best model to utilize in clinical practice, especially in primary care and low-income areas. To confirm our findings, further validation studies with the above four components were required.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularHepatitis B, ChronicLiver NeoplasmsAntiviral AgentsGuanineHumansTenofovirAntiviral AgentsentecavirGuanineTenofovirCalibrationDiscriminationPredictive value of testsRisk factorsSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID37582759
PMCPMC10428529

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.