SynthesisPloS one2026
Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAlC) versus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) B/C: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectivesDespite both hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) and sorafenib being efficacious for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), choosing between them for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages B/C patients remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to compare their therapeutic outcomes and prognoses in such patients.
methodsPubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis is Overall Survival (OS), while secondary outcomes include Progression-Free Survival (PFS), tumor response rate, and the incidence of adverse events. The analysis has included a total of 18 studies, comprising 3008 patients in aggregate.
resultsThe analysis revealed a combined Hazard Ratio (HR) for OS of 0.57 (95% CI 0.38-0.86) and for PFS of 0.46 (95% CI 0.38-0.57). Subgroup analysis by different HAIC regimens: FOLFOX-based HAIC regimens 0.28 (95% CI: 0.16-0.50), FP regimen 0.68 (95% CI: 0.25-1.87), New-FP regimen 0.60 (95% CI: 0.47-0.77), cisplatin-based HAIC 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47-0.85). The pooled ORs were: Complete Response (CR) 3.88 (95% CI 1.56-9.65), Partial Response (PR)4.72(95% CI 2.44-9.13), Stable Disease (SD) 0.83 (95% CI 0.45-1.53), Progressive Disease (PD) 0.35 (95% CI0.25-0.48, Objective Response Rate (ORR) 5.32 (95% CI 2.54-11.13), Disease Control Rate (DCR) 2.03 (95% CI 1.05-3.92). For adverse events (AEs), the overall incidence Odds Ratios (OR) was 0.53 (95% CI 0.06-4.82) and for grade 3-4 events, 0.49 (95% CI 0.28-0.85).
conclusionsIn Asian and African patients with BCLC stage B/C hepatocellular carcinoma, HAIC-particularly the FOLFOX regimen-confers superior overall survival and oncologic outcomes compared to sorafenib, with higher response and disease control rates and reduced disease progression.
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.