ReviewLiver research (Beijing, China)2024
Current status and new directions for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis.
Review in Liver research (Beijing, China), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging role of proteomics in advancing diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of liver cancer.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2026Review
- A digital twin for microwave liver treatment replanning.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) for tumor marker detection: technical evolution, clinical translation challenges, and future perspectives.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Review
- Single-cell analysis of TIGD genes in hepatocellular carcinoma: Prognostic value and functional characterization.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a high-confidence diagnostic model integrating ctDNA methylation and serum biomarkers for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma detection.Molecular biomedicine · 2026Article
- Preclinical mouse models for studying cholangiocarcinoma.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2026Review
- Bioactive glass nanoparticles induce pronounced cytotoxicity in human hepatocellular carcinoma Hep-G2 cells through ROS-mediated genomic instability and mitochondrial apoptosis.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Urease-driven nanomotors loaded with sorafenib for magnetically-guided accumulation and deep tissue penetration towards hepatocellular carcinoma therapy via ferroptosis induction.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Article
- Targeting lactic acidosis in the tumor microenvironment: Enhancing TACE efficacy in hepatocellular carcinoma.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver cancer ranks as the sixth most common cancer globally, with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounting for approximately 75%-85% of cases. Most patients present with moderately advanced disease, while those with advanced HCC face limited and ineffective treatment options. Despite diagnostic efforts, no ideal tumor marker exists to date, highlighting the urgent clinical need for improved early detection of HCC. A key research objective is the development of assays that target specific pathways involved in HCC progression. This review explores the pathological origin and development of HCC, providing insights into the mechanistic rationale, clinical statistics, and the advantages and limitations of commonly used diagnostic tumor markers. Additionally, it discusses the potential of emerging biomarkers for early diagnosis and offers a brief overview of relevant assay methodologies. This review aims to summarize existing markers and investigate new ones, providing a basis for subsequent research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.