ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Supportive care needs as an independent risk factor for survival in advanced liver cancer: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with advanced liver cancer often experience high unmet supportive care needs (SCN). However, longitudinal changes in SCN and their relationship with survival remain insufficiently understood. Objective: This study aimed to identify factors associated with longitudinal SCN and to examine the prognostic value of SCN in patients with advanced liver cancer. Methods: We enrolled 167 patients receiving transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (ZBI), and Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) were administered at baseline and at scheduled 6-month follow-up visits. Longitudinal SCNS total and domain scores were analyzed using random-slope linear mixed-effects models. Survival outcomes were evaluated using baseline Cox, time-dependent Cox, and lagged Cox models, with SCNS modeled as both a standardized continuous variable and categorical need groups. Results: Follow-up time, treatment response, HADS score, KPS score, ZBI score, education level, economic burden, and Child-Pugh grade were significantly associated with longitudinal SCNS total score. Progressive disease (PD) was associated with higher SCNS total score, whereas partial response (PR) was associated with lower SCNS total score. Domain-specific models showed that different SCN domains had distinct but overlapping determinants. In survival analyses, higher SCN was significantly associated with increased mortality. Each 1-SD increase in baseline SCNS total score was associated with higher mortality risk (HR = 1.95, 95% CI: 1.44-2.65). This association remained significant in the response-stratified time-dependent Cox model (HR = 3.17, 95% CI: 2.04-4.92) and in the lagged Cox model using previous-visit SCNS score to predict subsequent mortality (HR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.64-3.42). Conclusion: SCN in advanced liver cancer is dynamic and influenced by multidimensional psychosocial and clinical factors. Higher SCNS total score was independently associated with poorer survival across baseline, time-dependent, and lagged survival models, suggesting that SCN may serve as a dynamic prognostic indicator. These findings support integrating repeated SCNS screening into routine clinical follow-up to facilitate early, individualized supportive care interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.