Systemic Chemotherapy with Epirubicin for Treatment of Advanced or Multifocal Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the response rate and effect on survival of chemotherapy with epirubicin in non-resectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Fifty-two patients with non-resectable disease were treated with epirubicin. A treatment cycle consisted of 20 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1, 8 and 15 and was repeated every 4 weeks to a maximum dose of 1,000 mg/m(2). Forty-four patients were eligible for analysis. RESULTS: Out of 44 patients, 1 (2.3%) achieved a complete response, 3 (6.8%) had partial responses and 16 (36%) had stable disease (SD). For patients with successful disease control (complete and partial responders and patients with SD), the median survival was 16.2 months; for non-responders, it was 6.1 months (p < 0.003). Eight (88.9%) of 9 patients with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels <50 microg/l achieved successful disease control compared to 12 (34.9%) out of 35 patients with initially elevated AFP (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Epirubicin appears to be an active therapeutic option for patients with non-resectable HCC. Especially the subgroup of patients with low levels of AFP may benefit from this treatment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".