ArticleCancer cell international2026
Development of a G2/M checkpoint subtype classifier for guiding precision therapy in liver hepatocellular carcinoma patients.
Article in Cancer cell international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven tumor heterogeneity, current diagnostic and staging systems for liver hepatocellular carcinoma (LIHC) do not fully capture the complexity of clinical management. Aberrant activation of the G2/M checkpoint disrupts normal cell-cycle control and can enable proliferation of genomically damaged cells, thereby promoting tumor progression. Targeted inhibition of this pathway may force tumor cells into mitosis and subsequently trigger apoptosis.
methodsWe defined G2/M checkpoint (G2MC) subtypes using unsupervised clustering of gene expression profiles from the TCGA-LIHC cohort, together with corresponding clinical data. We then systematically compared biological and clinical differences between subtypes using survival analysis, clinical feature analysis, immune infiltration profiling, tumor mutational burden (TMB) analysis, and drug sensitivity assessment. Next, we developed a G2MC subtype classifier using machine-learning approaches, including an artificial neural network (ANN), and validated its clinical utility and predictive performance in an independent clinical cohort. Finally, we examined the biological effects of CENPA in vitro using two cancer cell lines.
resultsWe developed a G2MC pathway activity–based classifier to stratify LIHC patients by prognosis and predicted treatment response. The two G2MC subtypes showed distinct G2/M checkpoint–related expression patterns and mutational landscapes. Compared with subtype C1, subtype C2 had a higher G2MC score and was associated with worse survival, higher pathological grade, more advanced clinical stage, higher AFP levels, a lower predicted response to immunotherapy, and greater sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil and sorafenib. The classifier’s clinical applicability was further supported in an independent cohort of 30 clinical cases. In vitro experiments also provided additional evidence for the biological relevance of CENPA.
conclusionWe developed a classifier to identify G2MC subtypes in LIHC, which may support more precise prognostic assessment and treatment selection.
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.