TABLE 4.
Grade summary of finding table.
| Outcomes | № of participants (studies)follow-up | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Anticipated absolute effects | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk with [TACE] | Risk difference with [HAIC] | ||||
| Overall Survival (OS) assessed with: HR | 981 (7 non-randomised studies) | ⊕⊕○○ Low a , b , c | HR 0.53 (0.40–0.69) [Overall Survival] | Low | |
| 135 per 1,000 | 61 fewer per 1,000 (79 fewer to 40 fewer) | ||||
| Progression-free survival (PFS) assessed with: HR | 956 (6 non-randomised studies) | ⊕⊕○○ Low a , b , c | HR 0.54 (0.40–0.72) [progression-free survival] | Low | |
| 50 per 1,000 | 23 fewer per 1,000 (30 fewer to 14 fewer) | ||||
| Partial Response (PR) assessed with: RR | 1,060 (8 observational studies) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High a , d | RR 2.87 (2.18–3.78) | 150 per 1,000 | 280 more per 1,000 (177 more to 416 more) |
| Stable Disease (SD) assessed with: RR | 1,060 (7 observational studies) | ⊕○○○ Very low a , d | RR 0.77 (0.62–0.96) | 416 per 1,000 | 96 fewer per 1,000 (158 fewer to 17 fewer) |
| Progressive Disease (PD) assessed with: RR | 1,060 (8 observational studies) | ⊕○○○ Very low a , b , d , e | RR 0.54 (0.41–0.72) | 373 per 1,000 | 171 fewer per 1,000 (220 fewer to 112 fewer) |
| Intervention related Mortality assessed with: RR | 1,060 (8 observational studies) | ⊕○○○ Very low a , d | RR 0.56 (0.13–2.38) | 9 per 1,000 | 4 fewer per 1,000 (8 fewer to 13 more) |
| Resection assessed with: RR | 796 (5 observational studies) | ⊕⊕○○ Low a , d | RR 2.37 (1.54–3.66) | 60 per 1,000 | 104 more per 1,000 (33 more to 161 more) |
The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI, confidence interval; HR: hazard Ratio; RR: risk ratio. GRADE, Working Group grades of evidence. High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.
Most studies included are non-randomized, there exits unavoidable selection bias.
Significantly statistical heterogeneity.
Basic study design was define as non-randomised as only one study is RCT, whereas others were all observational cohort studies. But due to the existence of RCT, the real overall certainty of evidence maybe even higher.
Basic study design was define as observational as only one study is RCT, whereas others were all observational cohort studies. But due to the existence of RCT, the real overall certainty of evidence maybe even higher.
Clear asymmetry observed from publication bias funnel plot.
To highlight the results with statistical significance.