↓ Skip to main content

Optimal staging system for predicting the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a retrospective study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Optimal staging system for predicting the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a retrospective study
Published in
BMC Cancer, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2420-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lihui Su, Tao Zhou, Zongli Zhang, Xiuguo Zhang, Xuting Zhi, Caixia Li, Qingliang Wang, Chongqi Jia, Wenna Shi, Yanqiu Yue, Yanjing Gao, Baoquan Cheng

Abstract

Several staging systems have been developed to evaluate patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including the China Staging System (CS), the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system, and seventh edition; the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, and Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) staging system. The optimal staging system for to evaluate patients in China with HCC has not been determined. This study was designed to determine the optimal staging system for predicting patient prognosis by comparing the performances of these four staging systems in a cohort of Chinese patients with HCC. This study enrolled 307 consecutive Chinese patients with HCC in Shandong Province. The performances of the CS, TNM, BCLC, and CLIP staging systems were compared and ranked using a concordance index. Predictors of survival were identified using univariate and multivariate Cox model analyses. The mean overall survival of the patient cohort was 12.08 ± 11.87 months. Independent predictors of survival included tumor size, number of lesions, tumor thromboses, cirrhosis, serum albumin level and serum total bilirubin level. Compared with the other three staging systems, the CS staging system showed optimal performance as an independent predictor of patient survival. The BCLC staging system showed the poorest performance; its treatment algorithm was not suitable for patients in this study. CS was the most suitable staging system for predicting survival of patients with HCC in China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 19%
Student > Master 3 19%
Lecturer 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,335,423
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#6,507
of 8,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#308,657
of 355,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#180
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,325 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 355,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.