Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37902128›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2023

The effectiveness of ablative and non-surgical therapies for early hepatocellular carcinoma: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Emily South, Ros Wade, Sumayya Anwer, Sahar Sharif-Hurst, Melissa Harden, Helen Fulbright, Sofia Dias, Mark Simmonds, Ian Rowe, Patricia Thornton and 2 more

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

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emily SouthCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2187-4762
Ros WadeCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Sumayya AnwerCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Sahar Sharif-HurstCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Melissa HardenCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Helen FulbrightCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Sofia DiasCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2172-0221
Mark SimmondsCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Ian RoweLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Patricia ThorntonPatient Collaborator, UK.
Tze Min WahLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Alison EastwoodCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
University of York · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GBThe Patients Association · GB

Funding

Health Technology Assessment Programme NIHR131224
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsNon-surgical therapies are frequently used for patients with early or very early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of ablative and non-surgical therapies for patients with small HCC.

methodsNine databases were searched (March 2021) along with clinical trial registries. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any ablative or non-surgical therapy versus any comparator in patients with HCC ≤3 cm were eligible. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. The effectiveness of therapies was compared using NMA. Threshold analysis was undertaken to identify which NMA results had less robust evidence.

resultsThirty-seven eligible RCTs were included (including over 3700 patients). Most were from China (n = 17) or Japan (n = 7). Sample sizes ranged from 30 to 308 patients. The majority had a high RoB or some RoB concerns. No RCTs were identified for some therapies and no RCTs reported quality of life outcomes. The results of the NMA and treatment effectiveness rankings were very uncertain. However, the evidence demonstrated that percutaneous ethanol injection was worse than radiofrequency ablation for overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.45, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.16-1.82), progression-free survival (HR: 1.36, 95% CrI: 1.11-1.67), overall recurrence (relative risk [RR]: 1.19, 95% CrI: 1.02-1.39) and local recurrence (RR: 1.80, 95% CrI: 1.19-2.71). The threshold analysis suggested that robust evidence was lacking for some comparisons.

conclusionsIt is unclear which treatment is most effective for patients with small HCC because of limitations in the evidence base. It is also not known how these treatments would impact on quality of life. Further high quality RCTs are needed to provide robust evidence but may be difficult to undertake.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsChinaHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcomehepatocellular carcinomamicrowave ablationnetwork meta-analysispercutaneous ethanol injectionradiofrequency ablationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37902128
PMCPMC10709740
OpenAlexW4388014820

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.