Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 354

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies

Open access
Tandon, Puneeta, Garcia‐Tsao, Guadalupe·2009·Liver International

Abstract

Background: Although there are many studies of the predictors of death in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), most combine patients with and without cirrhosis and many combine those with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Objective: To perform a systematic review of the literature evaluating the predictors of death in patients with cirrhosis and HCC and to evaluate whether the predictors differ between patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Methods: Inclusion criteria: (i) publication in English, (ii) adult patients, (c) >80% of the patients had cirrhosis, (iv) follow‐up >6 months and (v) multivariable analysis. Quality was based on the accepted quality criteria for prognostic studies. Results: Of the 1106 references obtained, 947 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. A total of 23 968 patients were included in 72 studies (median, 177/study); 77% male, median age 64, 55% Child–Pugh class A. The most robust predictors of death were portal vein thrombosis, tumour size, α‐foetoprotein and Child–Pugh class. Sensitivity analysis using only 15 ‘good’ studies and 22 studies in which all patients had cirrhosis yielded the same variables. In the studies including mostly compensated or decompensated patients, the predictors were both liver and tumour related. However, these studies were few and the results were not robust. Conclusions: This systematic review of 72 studies shows that the most robust predictors of death in patients with cirrhosis and HCC are tumour related and liver related. Future prognostic studies should include these predictors and should be performed in specific patient populations to determine whether specific prognostic indicators are more relevant at different stages of cirrhosis.

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 · 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2008.01957.x

Cites

31 of 31 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 31 references

Cited by

See all 354

Metadata

Authors
Tandon, P., & Garcia‐Tsao, G.
Venue
Liver International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03-10
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
502-510
ISSN
  • 0106-9543 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-3223
  • 1478-3231
OpenAlex
W1544233162
Cited by
354
References
31
FWCI
2.39
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: Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1478-3231.2008.01957.x
The paper
Tandon, P., & Garcia‐Tsao, G. (2009). Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies. Liver International. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-3231.2008.01957.x

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.