You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 63, Issue 9
  • Response to fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma versus conventional hepatocellular carcinoma: better 5-year survival or artefactual result of research methodology?

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Response to fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma versus conventional hepatocellular carcinoma: better 5-year survival or artefactual result of research methodology?
  1. Tobias Eggert1,
  2. Katherine McGlynn1,
  3. Tim F Greten2,
  4. Sean Altekruse2
  1. 1MOB, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
  2. 2NCI, Center for Cancer Research, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Professor Tim F Greten, NCI, Center for Cancer Research, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA; tim.greten{at}nih.gov

https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-306407

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We are grateful for the opportunity to reply to Dr Njei's letter, which raised the question of whether a better 5-year survival for patients with fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma (fHCC) versus patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (that we recently reported), was real or an artefact of research methodology.1 In the letter, results of a meta-analysis were presented which were interpreted to show that the survival of fHCC and HCC do not differ in non-cirrhotic patients. We disagree …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles