Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma remains a significant cause of mortality worldwide, particularly among patients with liver cirrhosis. In most cases, surveillance in cirrhotic patients is neglected, leading to a diagnosis when the neoplasm is at an advanced stage. Within this context, Zhou et al carried out a network meta-analysis to demonstrate the effectiveness of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, concluding that it is a superior approach compared to sorafenib and transarterial chemoembolization in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Unfortunately, the meta-analysis in question lacks methodological rigor, preventing the authors from making more definitive assertions. Additionally, we understand that transarterial chemoembolization, when properly indicated, is a highly effective therapeutic option, and that sorafenib, given the results of new therapies based on immune checkpoint inhibitors, is no longer the recommended drug for the treatment of these patients. Therefore, we believe the use of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy is increasingly limited and lacks strong scientific support.