ReviewCancer pathogenesis and therapy2025
Relative treatment effects of first-line chemotherapy and immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Cancer pathogenesis and therapy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy and the fourth most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Despite advances in immunotherapies and targeted treatments for HCC, chemotherapy remains a valuable first-line treatment. However, the efficacy of immunotherapy compared to that of chemotherapy is unknown. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the effects of chemotherapy and immunotherapy on survival outcomes, response rates, and adverse effects. Methods: A thorough literature search of multiple electronic databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted from each database's inception to February 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared first-line chemotherapy (doxorubicin, cisplatin, sorafenib, and fluorouracil) with immunotherapy (pembrolizumab nivolumab, and tislelizumab) for advanced HCC. Two reviewers independently identified the studies, obtained relevant information, and assessed the possibility of bias. The hazard ratios (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were merged using random effects meta-analysis. Results: Twenty studies with 1183 patients were examined. All studies had a high risk of bias. According to a meta-analysis, immunotherapy was linked to a significantly better PFS than chemotherapy (HR, 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.00, Conclusions: First-line immunotherapy may offer PFS advantages over chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced HCC. However, a high risk of bias limits definitive conclusions. Larger, higher-quality RCTs are needed to confirm the potential benefits of OS and minimize bias. Although chemotherapy remains a valuable option in resource-limited settings where access to targeted therapies is restricted, the widespread availability of immunotherapy makes it essential to compare both treatments to determine the most appropriate first-line option for 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.