Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38807680›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2024

Regorafenib plus programmed death‑1 inhibitors vs. regorafenib monotherapy in second‑line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.

Zhao Li, Jie Wang, Jingbing Zhao, Zhengwei Leng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Synergistic mechanisms and clinical translation of regorafenib combination therapies.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  2. [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
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors.

Zhao LiDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas II, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan 637000, P.R. China.
Jie WangDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas II, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan 637000, P.R. China.
Jingbing ZhaoDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas II, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan 637000, P.R. China.
Zhengwei LengDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreas II, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, Sichuan 637000, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib plus programmed death-1 inhibitors (R-P) with regorafenib monotherapy as second-line therapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A systematic search of relevant literature published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases until October 2023 was conducted. Two authors independently performed data extraction and screening using standardized protocols. Stata/MP 17.0 was used for the meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of R-P treatment on major outcome indicators, including overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), tumor response and adverse reactions, in patients with advanced HCC. The results indicated that five cohort studies involving 444 patients with advanced HCC were included. The results revealed that R-P treatment improved overall survival [hazard ratio (HR), 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.77; I

Indexed as

hepatocellular carcinomameta-analysisprogrammed death-1regorafenib

Identifiers

PMID38807680
PMCPMC11130614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.