ArticleHeliyon2024
Which is the best TACE agent for patients with different NLR hepatocellular carcinomas? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- All You Need to Know About TACE: A Comprehensive Review of Indications, Techniques, Efficacy, Limits, and Technical Advancement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Hospital Mortality in Acute Decompensation of Alcoholic Liver Cirrhosis: Can Novel Survival Markers Outperform Traditional Ones?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Senolytic effect of triterpenoid complex fromFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is a common treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the best therapeutic agent for TACE treatment has not been determined. The neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a systemic immune system marker; however, the ability of the NLR to predict the prognosis of patients with HCC is unknown, and no studies have been conducted to determine the most appropriate TACE regimen for HCC patients with different NLRs. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI databases were searched through May 28, 2023. Comparisons of overall survival (OS) among cohort studies with different NLRs and different TACE treatment regimens were performed with a random effects model. Findings: Thirty-five studies involving 9210 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that Group 3-4 (NLR<2.5) patients had a significantly longer OS than Group 1-2 (NLR 2.5-5.0). Among the patients, Group 1-3 (NLR 2.0-5.0) patients had the best survival after treatment with adriamycin (lnHR (95 % CI = 0.48 [0.31, 0.75] and lnHR (95 % CI = 0.41 [0.19, 0.91]). Among the Group 4 patients (NLR<2.0), the best outcome was obtained with platinum + adriamycin (lnHR (95 % CI = 0.59 [0.45, 0.78]), followed by adriamycin. A subgroup analysis of TACE combined with other treatments showed that adriamycin combined with sorafenib was the most effective and superior to the other treatment agents. Interpretation: The NLR can be used to predict the prognosis of HCC patients treated with TACE; the higher the NLR is, the worse the prognosis. Adriamycin may be the best therapeutic agent for HCC patients treated with TACE.
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.