Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with bile duct tumor thrombus after hepatic resection or liver transplantation in Asian populations: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with bile duct tumor thrombus (BDTT) in the clinic is rare, and surgical treatment is currently considered the most effective treatment. However, the influence of BDTT on the prognosis of HCC patients who underwent surgery remains controversial in previous studies. Therefore, this paper uses meta-analysis method to elucidate this controversy. METHODS: In this study, we conducted a literature search on databases PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from inception until September 2016. Each study was evaluated with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The pooled effect was calculated, and the association between BDTT and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) was reevaluated using meta-analysis for hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 11 studies was included containing 5295 patients. The (HR) for OS and DFS was 3.21 and 1.81, 95%CI was 2.34-4.39 and 1.17-2.78 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that HCC patients with BDTT had a worse prognosis than those without BDTT after hepatic resection or liver transplantation (LT).
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".