ArticleJournal of liver cancer2025
Expert survey on systemic therapy indications for hepatocellular carcinoma in Korea: bridging clinical practice and reimbursement criteria.
Article in Journal of liver cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This survey aimed to collect expert opinions from multidisciplinary specialists involved in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Korea regarding real-world criteria for systemic therapy indications. In response to discrepancies between national reimbursement policies and clinical decision-making, members of the Korean Liver Cancer Association and Korean Association for the Study of the Liver participated in a web-based survey from February 4 to 14, 2025. A total of 89 respondents, primarily experienced clinicians, provided their views on major clinical scenarios including infiltrative HCC, bilobar multifocal disease, huge tumors, vascular invasion, extrahepatic metastasis, and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) refractoriness. There was high agreement for including infiltrative HCC (69.7%), suspected portal vein invasion (70.8%), and TACE refractoriness (82.0%) as systemic therapy indications. TACE refractoriness, in particular, aligns with current guideline definitions. Additionally, over half of respondents (51.7%) supported extrahepatic metastasis under similar conditions. Notably, multidisciplinary discussion was emphasized across scenarios, but many respondents also favored allowing primary physician discretion in select cases. This report provides consolidated expert input to inform future updates to reimbursement policies and promote alignment with real-world clinical practice. These findings may help bridge the gap between national coverage criteria and clinical decision in systemic therapy for 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.