The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Total tumor volume predicts risk of recurrence following liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma
Open accessAbstract
Criteria for the selection of candidates for liver transplantation in the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) should accurately predict posttransplant recurrence while not excluding excessive numbers of patients from candidacy. Existing criteria are challenged by the limited accuracy of radiological assessment. The total tumor volume (TTV) was calculated by the addition of the volume of each individual tumor. A preliminary analysis was carried out on HCC patient data from the Alberta Liver Transplant Program (52 patients) and then validated on the populations of the Universities of Toronto and Colorado programs (154 and 82 patients). A TTV cutoff of 115 cm(3) was chosen on the basis of the risk of recurrence with use of a receiver operating characteristic curve. Radiology correlated more closely to pathology with TTV than with Milan and University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) criteria (91% versus 69% and 75% of patients, P < 0.0001). Although more patients met qualifying criteria for transplant with TTV (28%-53% more than Milan and 16%-26% more than UCSF), no deterioration of outcome was demonstrated in an analysis of patients within TTV < or = 115 cm(3) in comparison with those meeting Milan or UCSF classifications at all institutions. Patients with TTV > 115 cm(3) experienced more recurrences and lower patient survival in the Alberta and Colorado series (P < 0.05). When TTV with a cutoff of 115 cm(3) is used for candidate selection, the accuracy of pretransplant radiological assessment is enhanced, with posttransplant outcomes not different from those achieved with Milan and UCSF classifications despite a more inclusive patient population.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
EASL–EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma
European Association for the Study of the Liver, & European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (2012) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.001 · Cited by 5,218
“The prognostic relevance of high AFP levels has been scarcely reported in controlled investigations [139], but has been shown to predict risk of drop-out in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation (cut-off of 200 ng/ml, or by increases of >15 ng/ml) [140,141], response to local ablation [142], response…”
BackgroundResultToso, C., Asthana, S., Bigam, D. L., Shapiro, A. M. J., & Kneteman, N. M. (2009) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.22693 · Cited by 332
Self-citationToso, C., Merani, S., Bigam, D. L., Shapiro, A. M. J., & Kneteman, N. M. (2010) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.23437 · Cited by 329
Self-citationDhir, M., Melin, A. A., Douaiher, J., Lin, C., Zhen, W. (., Hussain, S. M., Geschwind, J.-F. H., Doyle, M. B. M., Abou-Alfa, G. K., & Are, C. (2016) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001556 · Cited by 285
Metadata
- Authors
- Toso, C., Trotter, J., Wei, A., Bigam, D. L., Shah, S., Lancaster, J., Grant, D. R., Greig, P. D., Shapiro, A. M. J., & Kneteman, N. M.
- Venue
- Liver Transplantation
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1107-1115
- ISSN
- 1527-6465 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-6473
- OpenAlex
- W1996781488
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.10
- 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: Total tumor volume predicts risk of recurrence following liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/lt.21484
- The paper
- Toso, C., Trotter, J., Wei, A., Bigam, D. L., Shah, S., Lancaster, J., Grant, D. R., Greig, P. D., Shapiro, A. M. J., & Kneteman, N. M. (2008). Total tumor volume predicts risk of recurrence following liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.21484
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.