Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38611066›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Management of Portal Hypertension in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Systemic Treatment: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.

Valeria De Gaetano, Maria Pallozzi, Lucia Cerrito, Francesco Santopaolo, Leonardo Stella, Antonio Gasbarrini, Francesca Romana Ponziani

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. [Chinese expert consensus on the use of standardized second-line drugs for primary hepatocellular carcinoma].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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.

Valeria De GaetanoLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Maria PallozziLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Lucia CerritoLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6837-7582
Francesco SantopaoloLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1773-1171
Leonardo StellaLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3431-0803
Antonio GasbarriniLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6230-1779
Francesca Romana PonzianiLiver Unit, Centro Malattie dell'Apparato Digerente (CEMAD), Medicina Interna e Gastroenterologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario GemelliIstituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy.
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of CSPH in patients undergoing systemic treatment for HCC has emerged as a critical concern due to the absence of reliable diagnostic criteria and uncertainties surrounding therapeutic approaches. This review aims to underscore the primary pathophysiological aspects linking HCC and PH, while also addressing the current and emerging clinical strategies for the management of portal hypertension. A review of studies from January 2003 to June 2023 was conducted using the PubMed database and employing MeSH terms, such as "hepatocellular carcinoma", "immune checkpoint inhibitors", "systemic therapy", "portal hypertension", "variceal bleeding" and "tyrosine kinase inhibitors". Despite promising results of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in animal models for PH and fibrosis, only Sorafenib has demonstrated similar effects in human studies, whereas Lenvatinib appears to promote PH development. The impact of Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab on PH remains uncertain, with an increasing risk of bleeding related to Bevacizumab in patients with prior variceal hemorrhage. Given the absence of specific guidelines, endoscopic surveillance during treatment is advisable, and primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding should adhere to the Baveno VII recommendations. Furthermore, in patients with advanced HCC, refinement of diagnostic criteria for CSPH and guidelines for its surveillance are warranted.

Indexed as

angiogenesischronic inflammationhepatocellular carcinomaimmune checkpoint inhibitorsportal hypertensiontyrosine kinase inhibitorsvariceal bleeding

Identifiers

PMID38611066
PMCPMC11011056
OpenAlexW4393379406

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.