Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 275

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria

Open access
Xu, Xiao, Lu, Di, Ling, Qi, Wei, Xuyong, Wu, Jian, Zhou, Lin, Yan, Sheng, Wu, Liming, Geng, Lei, Ke, Qinghong, Gao, Feng, Tu, Zhenhua, Wang, Weilin, Zhang, Min, Shen, Yan, Xie, Haiyang, Jiang, Wenshi, Wang, Haibo, Zheng, Shusen·2016·Gut

Abstract

Objective: Liver transplantation is an optimal radical therapy for selected patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. The stringent organ allocation system driven by the Milan criteria has been challenged by alternative sets of expanded criteria. Careful analysis is needed to prove that the Milan criteria can be expanded safely and effectively. Design: This study collectively reviewed 6012 patients of hepatocellular carcinoma from the China Liver Transplant Registry. Expanded criteria were evaluated to characterise an optimised expansion with acceptable outcomes beyond the Milan criteria. Results: Compared with the Milan criteria, Valencia, University of California, San Francisco, University Clinic of Navarra and Hangzhou criteria provided an expansion of 12.4%, 16.3%, 19.6%, and 51.5%, respectively. The post-transplant survivals of patients fulfilling the expanded criteria were comparable to that of the Milan criteria. The analysis of net reclassification improvement and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves showed an excellent efficiency in recurrence prediction for the expanded criteria compared with the Milan criteria. In patients exceeding Milan but fulfilling the Hangzhou criteria (N=1352), α-fetoprotein (AFP) >100 ng/mL and tumour burden>8 cm were the only two independent prognostic factors (p<0.001). Accordingly, the Hangzhou criteria were stratified as type A (tumour burden ≤8 cm, or tumour burden >8 cm but AFP≤100 ng/mL) and type B (tumour burden >8 cm but AFP between 100 and 400 ng/mL). Type A showed significantly higher 5-year tumour-free survival rates compared with type B (p<0.001). Conclusions: The Milan criteria can be expanded safely and effectively. The prognostic stratification system based on the Hangzhou criteria serves as a hierarchy of transplant candidates for hepatocellular carcinoma.

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 · 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308513

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.

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

Cited by

See all 275

Metadata

Authors
Xu, X., Lu, D., Ling, Q., Wei, X., Wu, J., Zhou, L., Yan, S., Wu, L., Geng, L., Ke, Q., Gao, F., Tu, Z., Wang, W., Zhang, M., Shen, Y., Xie, H., Jiang, W., Wang, H., & Zheng, S.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-03-24
Volume
65
Issue
6
Pages
1035-1041
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2068056970
Cited by
275
References
0
FWCI
11.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308513
The paper
Xu, X., Lu, D., Ling, Q., Wei, X., Wu, J., Zhou, L., Yan, S., Wu, L., Geng, L., Ke, Q., Gao, F., Tu, Z., Wang, W., Zhang, M., Shen, Y., Xie, H., Jiang, W., Wang, H., & Zheng, S. (2016). Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308513

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.