↓ Skip to main content

Impact of neo-adjuvant Sorafenib treatment on liver transplantation in HCC patients - a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Impact of neo-adjuvant Sorafenib treatment on liver transplantation in HCC patients - a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial
Published in
BMC Cancer, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1373-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katrin Hoffmann, Tom Ganten, Daniel Gotthardtp, Boris Radeleff, Utz Settmacher, Otto Kollmar, Silvio Nadalin, Irini Karapanagiotou-Schenkel, Christof von Kalle, Dirk Jäger, Markus W Büchler, Peter Schemmer

Abstract

Liver Transplantation (LT) is treatment of choice for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within MILAN Criteria. Tumour progression and subsequent dropout from waiting list have significant impact on the survival. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) controls tumour growth in the treated HCC nodule, however, the risk of tumour development in the untreated liver is increased by simultaneous release of neo-angiogenic factors. Due to its anti-angiogenic effects, Sorafenib delays the progression of HCC. Aim of this study was to determine whether combination of TACE and Sorafenib improves tumour control in HCC patients on waiting list for LT. Fifty patients were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio in double-blinded fashion at four centers in Germany and treated with TACE plus either Sorafenib (n = 24) or placebo (n = 26). The end of treatment was development of progressive disease according to mRECIST criteria or LT. The primary endpoint of the trial was the Time-to-Progression (TTP). Other efficacy endpoints were Tumour Response, Progression-free Survival (PFS), and Time-to-LT (TTLT). The median time of treatment was 125 days with Sorafenib and 171 days with the placebo. Fourteen patients (seven from each group) developed tumour progression during the course of the study period. The Hazard Ratio of TTP was 1.106 (95% CI: 0.387, 3.162). The results of the Objective Response Rate, Disease Control Rate, PFS, and TTLT were comparable in both groups. The incidence of AEs was comparable in the placebo group (n = 23, 92%) and in the Sorafenib group (n = 23, 96%). Twelve patients (50%) on Sorafenib and four patients (16%) on placebo experienced severe treatment-related AEs. The TTP is similar after neo-adjuvant treatment with TACE and Sorafenib before LT compared to TACE and placebo. The Tumour Response, PFS, and TTLT were comparable. The safety profile of the Sorafenib group was similar to that of the placebo group. ISRCTN24081794.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 18%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 47%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 14 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2016.
All research outputs
#7,458,462
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,062
of 8,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,578
of 264,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#59
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,297 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.