ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2026
Individualized Risk Stratification for Early Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Clinical Tool Derived from a Large-Scale (n=3084) Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Early recurrence (typically within 2 years) following curative liver resection remains the primary obstacle to long-term survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Traditional linear staging systems frequently fail to capture the non-linear clinical and biological interactions driving early relapse. This study aimed to develop and validate a methodologically rigorous machine learning framework for precision post-hepatectomy risk stratification, and to deploy an interactive clinical tool. Patients and Methods: In this large-scale retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 3084 HCC patients who underwent curative resection. To strictly prevent data leakage and ensure generalizability, the cohort was partitioned into training (60%), validation (20%), and independent test (20%) sets prior to any preprocessing. Six ML algorithms were evaluated, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were employed to decode model transparency. A web-based calculator was subsequently deployed for clinical use. Results: XGBoost emerged as the optimal model, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.891 (95% CI: 0.865-0.915) on the independent test set, significantly outperforming traditional logistic regression (P < 0.0001). Using a rigorously optimized probability threshold of 0.310, the model yielded a sensitivity of 87.6% (95% CI: 83.5%-91.4%) and a specificity of 70.3% (95% CI: 65.4%-75.2%), with all confidence intervals derived from 2,000 bootstrap resamples. SHAP analysis identified tumor capsule integrity, neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER), and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as the most critical predictors of recurrence. Conclusion: This methodologically rigorous ML framework provides a highly sensitive, data-driven tool for individual risk stratification. By identifying high-risk patients, the web-based calculator can guide clinicians in implementing intensified postoperative surveillance and selecting candidates for targeted adjuvant interventions, ultimately improving oncological outcomes in HCC.
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.