ArticleEJNMMI research2025
Evaluation of the effect of locoregional treatment on metabolic liver function in hepatocellular carcinoma using
Article in EJNMMI research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of different locoregional treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on metabolic liver function is largely unknown. This information is crucial, particularly for patients with cirrhosis. We applied [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-galactose (18F-FDGal) positron emission tomography (PET) to determine the contribution of large HCCs to total metabolic liver function and the changes in metabolic liver function post-treatment.
resultsWe included 29 patients with HCC treated with resection (n = 8), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (n = 8), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) (n = 9), and selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) (n = 4). In patients with HCCs > 3 cm, the liver’s total metabolic activity was significantly higher when including the metabolically active tumor areas compared to when the tumor was excluded (p = 0.0002). The median percent change in mean metabolic activity in the liver after locoregional treatment was 5.1% in patients without cirrhosis as compared to -6.0% in patients with cirrhosis (p = 0.05). The distribution of cirrhosis (n = 15 in total) among treatment groups was uneven. After treatment, seven of eight patients who underwent resection showed increased or stable mean metabolic liver function, while responses for those treated with RFA, TACE, or SIRT were mixed. Changes in mean metabolic liver function and liver volume did not correlate.
conclusionsHCCs > 3 cm contributed substantially to the liver’s galactose metabolism, suggesting that this would also apply to other substrates used for measuring metabolic liver function. Changes in metabolic capacity following treatment depend on cirrhosis status and type of treatment. Changes in functional liver volume do not necessarily reflect total metabolic capacity. The study underlines the power of imaging-based quantification of metabolic liver function.
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.