ArticleClinical imaging2025
Comparison of prognostic accuracy of HCC staging systems in patients undergoing TACE.
Article in Clinical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Liver Dysfunction Explains a Substantial Proportion of Circulating cfDNA Variability in HCC: An Exploratory Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Selective Angiographic Roadmap Analysis (SARA) of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Feeding Arteries for Transarterial Chemoembolization.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Abstract
purposeTo compare the prognostic power of commonly used staging systems of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for predicting overall survival after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective single center study included patients with HCC who underwent TACE between 2008 and 2019 in a single tertiary care center. After initial screening of 408 consecutive patients, 317 patients with HCC treated with conventional or drug-eluting beads-TACE were included. Five HCC staging systems (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer, Hong Kong Liver Cancer, Japan Integrated Staging, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program and Okuda) were compared using Kaplan Meier survival analysis and a log-rank test with overall survival (OS) as the study endpoint. Uni- and multivariate analyses of system-specific variables were applied to stratify outcomes and compare the ability to predict OS of patients after TACE. Four different measures were used to assess the homogeneity (Likelihood ratio:LR), discriminatory ability (linear trend:LT and C-index) and explanatory ability (Akaike Information Criterion:AIC).
resultsThe OS of the total cohort was 29.8 months. In terms of prognostic stratification, the BCLC staging system had the best performance (LT: 8.209, LR: 26.639, AIC: 317, c-index: 0.818) compared to HKLC (LT: 10.919, LR: 25.802, AIC: 443, c-index: 0.835), JIS (LT: 4.611, LR: 16.880, AIC: 449, c-index: 0.548), CLIP (LT: 6.738, LR: 13.109, AIC: 501, c-index: 0.782), and Okuda (LT: 7.185, LR: 0.760. LR: 16.356, AIC: 487, c-index: 0.760).
conclusionAcross five commonly utilized international staging systems, the BCLC staging system demonstrated the greatest prognostic accuracy with respect to predicting OS of patients undergoing 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.