ReviewCancers2026
Therapeutic Time Migration in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Rethinking the Timing of Systemic Therapy Across the Disease Continuum.
Review in Cancers, 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
The management of hepatocellular carcinoma has traditionally followed a stage-dependent sequence in which surgery or thermal ablation is prioritized for early disease, transarterial approaches are used for intermediate-stage tumors, and systemic treatment is introduced after progression to advanced disease or loss of suitability for locoregional therapy. This paradigm was developed when systemic treatments had limited antitumor activity. Modern immune checkpoint inhibitors and immune-antiangiogenic combinations have substantially changed these premises. Randomized trials now demonstrate clinical benefit when systemic treatment is integrated with transarterial chemoembolization before conventional locoregional failure, while perioperative studies suggest that systemic treatment can also be moved into selected high-risk resectable disease. Conversely, updated adjuvant data indicate that simply administering systemic therapy at an earlier stage does not necessarily improve outcome after complete tumor eradication. We propose the concept of therapeutic time migration, whereby systemic treatment is introduced at an earlier biological point in selected patients, while hepatic reserve is preserved, occult systemic risk is becoming clinically relevant, and effective local treatment remains feasible. We explicitly distinguish this framework from the established concept of treatment stage migration and therapeutic hierarchy. This framework emphasizes treatment sequence rather than treatment escalation and suggests that timing itself may function as a dynamic therapeutic biomarker. Prospective studies should determine whether changing the order of systemic and locoregional therapy can modify immune activation, preserve liver function, increase conversion to definitive local treatment, and ultimately improve survival.
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.