ReviewCancers2026
Immunotherapy-Based Conversion to Curative-Intent Treatment in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multidisciplinary Framework.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations have become central systemic treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and are now being integrated into selected intermediate-stage settings. As tumor responses have improved, some patients who were not initially candidates for curative-intent treatment may later become candidates for resection, ablation, or liver transplantation. However, radiographic response alone does not define curative-intent candidacy, and no shared framework currently guides how post-immunotherapy response should be translated into a treatment decision. Terminology also differs regionally: Asian literature frames a resection-anchored paradigm, whereas Western practice uses transplant-anchored downstaging. This narrative review proposes a multidisciplinary framework for immunotherapy-based conversion to curative-intent treatment in HCC. We first clarify the lexicon of conversion, downstaging, bridging, neoadjuvant therapy, post-ICI transplantation, and drug-free or treatment-free status. We then summarize conversion-relevant evidence across key clinical decision settings, including transarterial chemoembolization (TACE)-unsuitable intermediate-stage disease, portal vein tumor thrombus or macrovascular invasion, borderline-resectable or locally advanced disease, and transplant downstaging or bridging. The central framework defines curative-intent transition through the intersection of three domains: technical suitability, oncologic suitability, and physiologic or liver-reserve suitability. Biomarkers, imaging response, tumor-marker kinetics, liver function, and treatment-related toxicity are discussed as inputs into candidacy rather than as response measures alone. Finally, we propose a multidisciplinary workflow and highlight lessons from pancreatic cancer, biliary tract cancer, and colorectal liver metastases. As an expert-opinion-based framework, this approach should structure multidisciplinary discussion rather than serve as validated selection criteria; harmonized terminology, prospective conversion registries, and conversion-specific endpoints are needed for prospective validation.
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.