ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Tumour-host divergence: a hypothesis for personalised blood-based early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains lethal because most tumours are found too late for cure, and the blood biomarkers used for surveillance - chiefly alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) - miss many early-stage and AFP-negative tumours; despite three decades of discovery, single-analyte and marker-plus-AFP panels have converged on a performance ceiling. We advance the tumour-host divergence (THD) hypothesis: that early malignant emergence is better detected as a personalised anomaly than as a population classification, and that pairing tumour-shed signals with the host's immune-inflammatory response - read along each patient's own trajectory and conditioned on aetiology - can reveal small tumours that any single marker, measured once against a population threshold, will miss. The hypothesis rests on three complementary axes: a temporal axis interpreting change from the individual's baseline rather than a fixed cut-off; a compartmental axis treating the coupling between tumour-shed and host-response signals as the quantity of interest, on the premise that a small tumour may perturb the host before it sheds detectable marker; and a contextual axis conditioning interpretation on aetiology and fibrosis stage, including metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. These axes are integrated by a per-patient longitudinal risk model that flags malignant emergence as a departure from the patient's stable equilibrium. To show that this gap is real rather than assumed, we map the field across a de-duplicated corpus of 8,069 PubMed and Embase records with an explicit, reproducible taxonomy, finding research effort concentrated on tumour-derived analytes - which outnumber host-response analytes by roughly six and a half to one - far more work on prognosis than early detection, and the temporal, paired-compartment and aetiology-conditioned dimensions almost unexplored. The hypothesis is deliberately falsifiable: its central predictions are benchmarked against GALAD and are testable in surveillance cohorts that already generate longitudinal data. Its contribution is integrative - reorganising existing biomarkers rather than requiring new ones - and is aimed at the early-stage and AFP-negative patients of greatest unmet need.
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.