|
Early detection
|
|
|
| Study design |
Prospective [37],[42],[45],[55],[57]
|
OR 1.70 (95% CI 1.29–2.26) |
|
Retrospective [17],[18],[29],[32]–[35],[38],[41],[43],[44],[47],[49],[52],[53],[61],[63]
|
OR 2.30 (95% CI 1.98–2.67) |
| Location of study |
Asia [17],[34],[38],[49]
|
OR 2.22 (95% CI 1.75–2.81) |
|
Europe [37],[42],[55],[57],[63]
|
OR 2.00 (95% CI 1.70–2.35) |
|
United States [32],[33],[35],[41],[43]–[45],[47],[52],[53],[61]
|
OR 2.31 (95% CI 1.79–2.99) |
| Study period |
During 1990s [17],[29],[49],[53],[55]
|
OR 2.22 (95% CI 1.77–2.79) |
|
After 2000 [18],[32]–[35],[37],[38],[41]–[43],[45],[47],[52],[57],[61],[63]
|
OR 2.18 (95% CI 1.86–2.56) |
| Type of surveillance test |
Ultrasound alone [18],[32],[38],[47],[61]
|
OR 2.04 (95% CI 1.55–2.68) |
|
Ultrasound ± AFP [17],[29],[34],[35],[37],[42]–[45],[49],[52],[53],[55],[63]
|
OR 2.16 (95% CI 1.80–2.60) |
| Study size |
More than 100 patients [17],[18],[29],[32]–[34],[37],[38],[41],[42],[47],[48],[50],[52],[55],[57],[61]
|
OR 2.13 (95% CI 1.88–2.39) |
|
Receipt of curative treatment
|
|
|
| Study design |
Prospective [21],[22],[31],[37],[40]
|
OR 2.37 (95% CI 1.51–3.72) |
|
Retrospective [17],[19],[20],[26],[28]–[30],[32]–[36],[38],[43],[44],[46],[47],[49]–[51],[53]–[55],[58]–[63]
|
OR 2.18 (95% CI 1.94–2.45) |
| Location of study |
Asia [17],[22],[31],[34],[38],[49]–[51],[54],[58],[62]
|
OR 2.19 (95% CI 1.84–2.61) |
|
Europe [19],[21],[26],[28],[30],[36],[37],[40],[55],[63]
|
OR 1.87 (95% CI 1.51–2.31) |
|
United States [32],[33],[35],[43],[44],[46],[47],[53],[59],[61]
|
OR 2.52 (95% CI 1.99–3.20) |
| Study period |
Prior to 1990 [26],[44],[50],[54]
|
OR 2.12 (95% CI 1.25–3.61) |
|
During 1990s [17],[19],[20],[22],[28]–[31],[36],[40],[49],[51],[53],[55],[59],[60],[62]
|
OR 2.23 (95% CI 1.87–2.67) |
|
After 2000 [21],[32],[34],[35],[37],[38],[43]–[47],[58],[61],[63]
|
OR 2.13 (95% CI 1.85–2.44) |
| Type of surveillance test |
Ultrasound alone [20],[28],[32],[38],[46],[47],[61],[62]
|
OR 2.23 (95% CI 1.83–2.71) |
|
Ultrasound ± AFP [17],[19],[22],[26],[29]–[31],[34]–[37],[40],[43],[44],[49]–[51],[53]–[55],[58]–[60],[63]
|
OR 2.19 (95% CI 1.89–2.53) |
| Study size |
More than 100 patients [17],[19]–[22],[29],[31]–[34],[36]–[38],[40],[47],[49]–[51],[54],[55],[58],[61],[62]
|
OR 2.18 (95% CI 1.91–2.48) |
|
3-year survival
|
|
|
| Location of study |
Asia [17],[22],[34],[38],[39],[49],[51],[54],[58],[62]
|
57.4% for surveillance vs. 31.7% for non-surveillance |
|
Europe [19],[40],[55]
|
47.3% for surveillance vs. 21.8% for non-surveillance |
|
United States [25],[27],[35],[43],[44],[47],[52],[53],[59],[61]
|
36.5% for surveillance vs. 18.2% for non-surveillance |
| Study period |
Prior to 1990 [39],[44],[54]
|
51.1% for surveillance vs. 25.4% for non-surveillance |
|
During 1990s [17],[19],[22],[40],[49],[51],[53],[55],[59]
|
57.6% for surveillance vs. 32.2% for non-surveillance |
|
After 2000 [25],[27],[34],[35],[38],[43],[47],[52],[58],[61]
|
42.8% for surveillance vs. 24.1% for non-surveillance |
| Liver function |
Child C cirrhosis ≥10% cohort [19],[25],[40],[44],[47],[54],[61]
|
57.0% for surveillance vs. 29.2% for non-surveillance |
|
Child C cirrhosis <10% cohort [22],[34],[49],[51],[52],[53],[55],[58]
|
49.8% for surveillance vs. 22.0% for non-surveillance |
| Overall study quality |
Low quality [17],[19],[22],[25],[35],[38],[39],[43],[47],[52],[54],[59],[61]
|
54.7% for surveillance vs. 26.9% for non-surveillance |
|
High quality [27],[34],[40],[44],[49],[51],[53],[55],[58],[62]
|
45.6% for surveillance vs. 28.8% for non-surveillance |
| Lead time bias assessment |
Did not adjust for lead time bias [17],[19],[22],[25],[34],[35],[38]–[40],[43],[44],[47],[51],[52],[54],[59],[61]
|
55.5% for surveillance vs. 27.4% for non-surveillance |
|
Adjusted for lead time bias [27],[49],[53],[55],[58],[62]
|
39.7% for surveillance vs. 29.1% for non-surveillance |
| Study size |
More than 100 patients [17],[19],[22],[25],[27],[34],[38]–[40],[47],[49],[51],[52],[54],[55],[58],[61],[62]
|
50.7% for surveillance vs. 39.0% for non-surveillance |
