ReviewJournal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute2026
From black-box prediction to transparent insight: the status quo and paradigm shift of explainable artificial intelligence in hepatocellular carcinoma research.
Review in Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a malignancy with high global incidence and mortality, whose significant heterogeneity and poor prognosis pose severe clinical challenges. While artificial intelligence (AI) shows potential in HCC imaging, pathology, and prognosis, its "black-box" nature limits clinical adoption. Explainable AI (XAI) aims to reveal the decision-making logic of AI models. This narrative review synthesizes recent advances of XAI across four key domains of HCC research. In imaging diagnosis, techniques such as Grad-CAM and SHAP have enabled semantic alignment between AI outputs and clinical standards like LI-RADS, enhancing interpretability. In biomarker discovery, XAI has progressed from identifying single markers to revealing functional gene modules and molecular subtypes through multi-omics integration. In treatment efficacy prediction, XAI-based models have quantified feature contributions to therapeutic responses, supporting individualized treatment stratification. In prognosis assessment, XAI has enabled dynamic risk stratification by integrating clinical, imaging, and pathological features. However, three cross-cutting limitations persist across these domains: explanations remain predominantly correlational rather than causal, a semantic gap exists between pixel-level heatmaps and high-level clinical reasoning, and most models are static, unable to adapt to evolving clinical data. Current research is moving toward causal inference frameworks, concept-driven interpretability, and interactive, dynamic systems. In summary, XAI is transitioning from a retrospective explanation tool toward a prospective clinical decision partner, yet bridging the gap between explanation and actionable decision support remains the central challenge.
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.