Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37544418›Full record

Trial reportClinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association2024

Financial Burden of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Patients With Cirrhosis.

Manasa Narasimman, Ruben Hernaez, Vanessa Cerda, MinJae Lee, Sruthi Yekkaluri, Aisha Khan, Anubha Sood, Tami Gurley, Lisa Quirk, Yan Liu and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Manasa NarasimmanDepartment of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Ruben HernaezCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas.
Vanessa CerdaPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
MinJae LeePeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Sruthi YekkaluriDepartment of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Aisha KhanCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas.
Anubha SoodPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Tami GurleyPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Lisa QuirkDepartment of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Yan LiuCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas.
Jennifer R KramerCenter for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas.
Simon Craddock LeePeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Jasmin A TiroPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Caitlin C MurphyPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas.
Amit G SingalDepartment of Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health Hospital System, Dallas, Texas. Electronic address: amit.singal@utsouthwestern.edu.

Funding

UT Southwestern Medical Center Simmons Comprehensive Cancer CenterP30CA142543 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI Kathryn Ann O'Donnell · 2010 to 2026
$53.7M
Precision Risk Stratification and Screening for HCC among Patients with Cirrhosis in the United StatesU01CA230694 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI SINGAL, AMIT · 2018 to 2022
$3.5M
Harms of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening in Patients with CirrhosisR01CA212008 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI SINGAL, AMIT · 2017 to 2022
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA142543NCI NIH HHS R01 CA212008NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230694
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe overall value of hepatocellular carcinoma screening is defined by the balance of benefits and harms. Studies have only reported physical harms with none describing financial harms.

methodsWe conducted a multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial of hepatocellular carcinoma screening outreach among 2872 patients with cirrhosis from March 2018 to April 2021. Patients with positive or indeterminate results and matched patients with negative results completed surveys at baseline and at follow-up measuring financial harms via Cancer Self-Administered Questionnaire and financial burden via Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy. Univariable and multivariable longitudinal regression analyses were performed to compare changes in financial harms across groups: true positive, true negative, false positive, and indeterminate. Semistructured interviews were conducted in a subset of patients, sampled by center and test result.

resultsOf 311 patients who completed at least 1 follow-up survey (75% response rate), 37 had true positive, 133 true negative, 64 false positive, and 77 indeterminate results. Financial harms increased in true positive and false positive patients with no significant changes noted among those with true negative or indeterminate results. At follow-up, 21.8% of patients reported moderate-severe financial burden, which was not significantly associated with test results. Semistructured interviews revealed variation in the frequency and severity of financial harms based on test results, with increased harm in those with false positive results.

conclusionsFinancial harms of hepatocellular carcinoma screening vary by test result and can pose a barrier that must be considered when determining the optimal screening program.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsFinancial StressHumansLiver CirrhosisCirrhosisCostHarmsLiver CancerScreening

Identifiers

PMID37544418
PMCPMC12206404

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.