ArticleInsights into imaging2025
Radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: 10-year outcomes of local tumor progression vs intrahepatic distant recurrence.
Article in Insights into imaging, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the long-term outcome of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for local tumor progression (LTP) vs intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR) in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC), including cases with repeated LTP. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom 2010 to 2022, 1326 rHCC patients treated with curative-intent RFA were identified. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the bias between the LTP group and the IDR group. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were compared between groups using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsA total of 584 patients were finally enrolled (125 LTPs, 459 IDRs), with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. After PSM, 218 patients (109 patients in each group) were selected. The median OS was comparable between LTP and IDR (70.3 months vs 93.1 months, p = 0.974). However, PFS was significantly worse in the LTP group (13.8 months vs 20.9 months, p = 0.028). LTP incidence was higher in the LTP group (42.2% vs 12.8%, p < 0.001). Multiple recurrences, early recurrence (≤ 1 year), and ≥ 3 LTP episodes were independent risk factors for OS. The median OS decreased with increasing LTP episodes (0: 99.3 months; 1: 86.9 months; 2: 88.9 months; ≥ 3: 44.9 months, p = 0.031).
conclusionsRFA demonstrated effective control of LTP in rHCC, with comparable OS but worse PFS compared with IDR, primarily due to the higher risk of LTP. RFA may not be the first choice for those with ≥ 3 LTP episodes. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: LTP of hepatocellular carcinoma shows higher recurrence than IDR after RFA, requiring close follow-up. Three or more repeat LTPs significantly worsen prognosis, suggesting the need for alternative treatment strategies. KEY POINTS: Long-term outcomes of RFA for LTP vs IDR of hepatocellular carcinoma remain unclear. LTP has worse PFS; ≥ 3 repeat LTP significantly worsens OS. LTP tends to recur after RFA, requiring close follow-up; ≥ 3 repeat LTPs need alternative local treatment.
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.