ReviewLiver cancer2025
Demographics and Immunotherapy Efficacy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Phase III Clinical Trials.
Review in Liver cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison of four treatments based on patients reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves of randomized trials.World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Sarcopenia modifies the survival benefit of triple therapy versus TACE alone in elderly patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The China Paradox in LEAP-012 Trial.Liver cancer · 2026Article
- Identification of the CYP19A1-GPER1 axis as a critical oncogenic driver in hepatocellular carcinoma via AKT activation.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in 2026: Current Standard-of-Care and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Etiology Dependent Differences in Immunotherapy Response and Prognosis Between MASH-HCC and HBV-HCC.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- Reevaluating the Role of Demographic and Etiological Factors in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Liver cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are fundamental in treating advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Considering previous reports implied varied responses among patient subgroups, such as patients with different hepatitis etiologies, we planned this meta-analysis to identify specific populations that might derive greater survival benefits from ICIs as a first-line treatment. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for phase III clinical trials comparing ICIs and multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) as first-line therapies for advanced HCC. We extracted and synthesized hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival across different patient subgroups mainly using the random-effect model. Results: Our analysis included nine phase III trials involving ICIs, either alone or in combination with other treatments, compared with MKIs. The synthesized HRs for patients with hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and nonviral etiologies were 0.74, 0.77, and 0.86, respectively, showing no significant differences ( Conclusion: The efficacy of ICIs as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC was consistent across diverse patient subgroups, regardless of hepatitis etiology or other demographic factors. These findings do not support using these characteristics to determine the use of ICI therapy in advanced HCC.
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.