Outcomes after hepatic resection and subsequent multimodal treatment of recurrence for multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of liver resection in patients with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with well preserved liver function is controversial. This study was conducted to evaluate the outcomes of such patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent liver resection for multifocal HCC between 1992 and 2011. Postoperative outcomes, survival and predictors of outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: Of 46 patients who underwent hepatic resection for multifocal HCC, 38 had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B disease. Major hepatectomy was performed in 27 patients, and major complications occurred in nine (20 per cent). The 90-day postoperative mortality rate was 7 per cent. Overall 1-, 2-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 78, 64, 59 and 53 per cent respectively (median 70 months), whereas corresponding recurrence-free survival rates were 53, 32, 30 and 27 per cent (median 14 months). Recurrence developed in 28 (61 per cent) of the 46 patients, affecting the liver only in 22. Three-quarters of patients with recurrence underwent further therapy. Major hepatectomy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.14 to 0·95; P = 0·038), microvascular (HR 3·44, 1·35 to 8·74; P = 0·009) and macrovascular (HR 2·68, 1·11 to 6·43; P = 0·028) invasion, and cirrhosis (HR 3·15, 1·12 to 8·86; P = 0·029) were associated with overall survival. Microvascular invasion (HR 2·81, 1·06 to 7·40; P = 0·037), cirrhosis (HR 3·12, 1·41 to 6·88; P < 0·001) and bilobar disease (HR 2·93, 1·09 to 7·88; P = 0·033) were associated with recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with multifocal HCC and well preserved liver function, long-term survival is possible after liver resection and subsequent aggressive treatment of recurrence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".