ReviewGut and liver2025
Precision Strategy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance after Hepatitis C Cure: Debates across Guidelines.
Review in Gut and liver, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeated measurements of alpha fetoprotein and fibrosis-4 predict long term hepatocellular carcinoma and mortality risks after antiviral therapy.Infectious medicine · 2026Article
- Cabozantinib activates TFEB-mediated autophagy to exert anti-tumor effects in hepatocellular carcinoma.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatitis C virus (HCV) clearance markedly reduces the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, HCC continues to develop in a subset of patients, particularly in those with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. Leading hepatology societies, including Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver, European Association for the Study of the Liver, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, Korean Association for the Study of the Liver, Taiwan Association for the Study of the Liver, and Japan Society of Hepatology, have issued divergent guidelines for HCC surveillance after sustained virologic response, which reflects variations in regional patient populations, healthcare infrastructure, and policy priorities. While traditional risk stratification primarily centers on histological staging of fibrosis, an array of additional host-related factors, including age, sex, alcohol use, metabolic comorbidities, and genetic and epigenetic profiles, further influence individual HCC risks. Recently developed predictive models aim to improve risk discrimination and inform tailored surveillance intervals. Concurrently, health economic analyses support the continuation of surveillance in high-risk populations. Nonetheless, the optimal surveillance frequency and criteria for patient selection remain matters of ongoing debates. This review synthesizes current controversies across international guidelines, presents an evaluation of the supporting evidence for varied surveillance strategies, highlights emerging tools for individualized risk assessment, and discusses cost-effectiveness considerations to inform personalized, evidence-based HCC surveillance in the post-HCV cure landscape.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.