Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 238

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization Plus Radiotherapy Compared With Chemoembolization Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Open access
Huo, Ya Ruth, Eslick, Guy D.·2015·JAMA Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has the second-highest cancer-related mortality rate in the world because most patients are diagnosed at an intermediate to advanced stage when surgery is not suitable. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is currently considered a first-line therapy for unresectable HCC. However, advancements in radiotherapy (RT) have resulted in some studies identifying a significant therapeutic benefit of TACE plus RT for unresectable HCC compared with TACE alone. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TACE plus RT compared with TACE alone for unresectable HCC using meta-analytical techniques. DATA SOURCES: A search of Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was done from inception to January 14, 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Published trials that included a treatment group receiving TACE plus RT and a control group receiving TACE alone with data for at least 1-year survival or tumor response were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated for the effect of TACE plus RT vs TACE alone on survival, tumor response, and adverse events using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses of study design, anticancer drug, RT type, embolization type, presence of portal venous tumor thrombosis (PVTT), and time between treatments with TACE and RT were performed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survival, tumor response, adverse events, study design, anticancer drug, RT type, embolization type, presence of PVTT, and time between TACE and RT. RESULTS: There were 25 trials (11 RCTs) involving 2577 patients. Patients receiving TACE plus RT showed significantly better 1-year survival (OR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.19-1.54]) and complete response (clearance of the lesion after treatment) (OR, 2.73 [95% CI, 1.95-3.81]) compared with TACE alone. The survival benefit progressively increased for 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival (respectively: OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.31-1.85]; OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.55-2.35]; OR, 3.01 [95% CI, 1.38-6.55]; OR, 3.98 [95% CI, 1.86-8.51]). There was an increased incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers and elevated levels of alanine transaminase and total bilirubin in patients receiving TACE plus RT compared with those receiving TACE alone. Subgroup analyses showed nonsignificant trends in which survival was greater for TACE plus RT in patients with PVTT compared with those without PVTT. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: TACE plus RT was more therapeutically beneficial than TACE alone for treating HCC, and should be recommended for suitable patients with unresectable HCC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2189

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 238

Metadata

Authors
Huo, Y. R., & Eslick, G. D.
Venue
JAMA Oncology
Published
2015-09-01
Volume
1
Issue
6
Pages
756
ISSN
2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1535977601
Cited by
238
References
2
FWCI
6.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization Plus Radiotherapy Compared With Chemoembolization Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2189
The paper
Huo, Y. R., & Eslick, G. D. (2015). Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization Plus Radiotherapy Compared With Chemoembolization Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2189

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.