ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2024
Clinical usefulness of newly developed prognostic predictive score for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Prognostic impact of CRAFITY score in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.iScience · 2025Article
- Radiomics-based prediction of HCC response to atezolizumab/bevacizumab.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- Noninvasive prediction of the clinical benefit of immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Efficacy of combined TAE, HAIC, targeted, and immunotherapy in unresectable HCC: a multicenter propensity score matching study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Characteristics and Prognosis of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab Combination Therapy Who Achieved Complete Response.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Clinical usefulness of newly developed prognostic predictive score for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Prognostic Biomarkers for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Treated With Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab Combination Therapy.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
45 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of the present study was to elucidate detailed parameters for prediction of prognosis for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) treatment.
methodsA total of 719 patients (males 577, median age 74 years) treated with Atez/Bev between September 2020 and January 2023 were enrolled. Factors related to overall survival (OS) were extracted and a prognostic scoring system based on hazard ratio (HR) was created. OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were retrospectively examined, and the prognostic ability of the newly developed system was compared to CRAFITY score using concordance index (c-index) and Akaike information criterion (AIC) results.
resultsCox-hazards multivariate analysis showed BCLC classification C/D (HR 1.4; 1 point), AFP ≥100 ng/mL (HR 1.4; 1 point), mALBI 2a (HR 1.7; 1 point), mALBI 2b/3 (HR 2.8; 2 points), and DCP ≥100 mAU/mL (HR 1.6; 1 point) as significant factors. The assigned points were added and used to develop the IMmunotherapy with AFP, BCLC staging, mALBI, and DCP evaluation (IMABALI-De) scoring system. For IMABALI-De scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, OS was not applicable (NA), NA, 26.11, 18.79, 14.07, and 8.32 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 2788.67, c-index 0.699), while for CRAFITY scores of 0, 1, and 2, OS was 26.11, 20.29, and 11.32 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 2864.54, c-index 0.606). PFS periods for those IMABALI-De scores were 21.75, 12.89, 9.18, 8.0, 5.0, and 3.75 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 5203.32, c-index 0.623) and for the CRAFITY scores were 10.32, 7.68, and 3.57 months, respectively (p < .001; AIC 5246.61, c-index 0.574). As compared with CRAFITY score, IMABALI-De score had better AIC and c-index results for both OS and PFS.
conclusionThe present results indicated that the proposed IMABALI-De score may be favorable for predicting prognosis of uHCC patients receiving Atez/Bev therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.