4.8 Review

Risk stratification and early detection biomarkers for precision HCC screening

Journal

HEPATOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue 1, Pages 319-362

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1002/hep.32779

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mortality remains high due to late diagnosis, but traditional screening approaches may not be practical in the face of shifting disease etiologies. New modalities and strategies are urgently needed to improve early HCC detection.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mortality remains high primarily due to late diagnosis as a consequence of failed early detection. Professional societies recommend semi-annual HCC screening in at-risk patients with chronic liver disease to increase the likelihood of curative treatment receipt and improve survival. However, recent dynamic shift of HCC etiologies from viral to metabolic liver diseases has significantly increased the potential target population for the screening, whereas annual incidence rate has become substantially lower. Thus, with the contemporary HCC etiologies, the traditional screening approach might not be practical and cost-effective. HCC screening consists of (i) definition of rational at-risk population, and subsequent (ii) repeated application of early detection tests to the population at regular intervals. The suboptimal performance of the currently available HCC screening tests highlights an urgent need for new modalities and strategies to improve early HCC detection. In this review, we overview recent developments of clinical, molecular, and imaging-based tools to address the current challenge, and discuss conceptual framework and approaches of their clinical translation and implementation. These encouraging progresses are expected to transform the current one-size-fits-all HCC screening into individualized precision approaches to early HCC detection and ultimately improve the poor HCC prognosis in the foreseeable future.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available