ReviewJournal of liver cancer2026
Re-evaluating DAA therapy in active hepatocellular carcinoma: from controversy to clinical considerations.
Review in Journal of liver cancer, 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
Abstract
Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy has brought a revolution to the management of chronic hepatitis C virus infection, but its role in patients with active hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. Early observations suggested a high rate of HCC recurrence following DAA treatment, raising concerns about a potential oncogenic effect regarding rapid viral clearance. However, subsequent large-scale cohort studies and meta-analyses have not consistently confirmed this finding, leading to an overall neutral conclusion regarding the impact of DAA on HCC recurrence. International guidelines from organizations such as the American Gastroenterological Association, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, European Association for the Study of the Liver, and Korean Association for the Study of the Liver offer conflicting recommendations, underscoring the absence of a universal framework for this patient population. While the available evidence is largely heterogeneous and retrospective, current data indicate that DAA therapy can be safely integrated into HCC management without clear evidence of harm. Oncologic outcomes, particularly overall and recurrence-free survival, are most favorable when DAAs are administered in close proximity to curative procedures or in non-transplant therapeutic settings. In contrast, studies in liver transplant candidates often show a neutral effect on oncologic outcomes after adjusting for confounding variables. These findings underscore the necessity of individualized, multidisciplinary decisions based on tumor biology, hepatic reserve, and treatment intent. Prospective studies and validated biomarkers are essential to establish a more definitive framework for optimizing DAA therapy in this complex clinical context.
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.