SynthesisBMJ open gastroenterology2026
Diagnostic accuracy of surveillance tests for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open gastroenterology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFor surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to be effective, tests-including imaging, serological biomarkers (conventional and genomic) and algorithms combining multiple tests-must identify early-stage tumours. We aimed to identify, appraise and synthesise studies reporting the accuracy of all such tests in people with cirrhosis.
designSystematic review and network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (NMA-DTA) data. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Embase (2005 to September 2025) and a published Cochrane review. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: English-language, post-2005, one-gate or two-gate studies quantifying diagnostic accuracy of tests to detect HCC in populations wholly comprising people with cirrhosis, excluding those with pre-existing signs and symptoms of HCC. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extracted by one reviewer, checked by a second and made available in an open-access database. We assessed risk of bias using QUADAS-2. We synthesised data using Bayesian NMA-DTA, accounting for tumour stage and incorporating continuous tests across all possible thresholds.
resultsWe included 170 studies (62 643 participants). Of 115 index tests, 97 were amenable to NMA-DTA. Ultrasound appears no better than alpha-fetoprotein at detecting very-early-stage HCC (sensitivity 0.34 (95% CrI 0.21 to 0.55) vs 0.39 (95% CrI 0.28 to 0.47)), only becoming superior as stage advances. Least affected by stage are contrast-enhanced MRI (sensitivity 0.70 (95% CrI 0.50 to 0.84) very-early; 0.86 (95% CrI 0.73 to 0.94) early; 0.90 (95% CrI 0.67 to 0.98) advanced) and CT (0.68 (95% CrI 0.26 to 0.93) very-early; 0.77 (95% CrI 0.29 to 0.95) early; 0.92 (95% CrI 0.49 to 0.99) advanced). No genomic biomarkers show convincing improvements over combinations of conventional blood-markers. Most studies are at high risk of bias, but conclusions are robust when restricting to studies with favourable methodological characteristics.
conclusionsUsing advanced synthesis methods, we found that tests have low sensitivity for detecting early-stage HCC. Given rising prevalence of cirrhosis and HCC, we need better tests and a stronger evidence-base to inform optimal surveillance strategies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022357163.
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.