BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Retrospective Study Open Access
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. No commercial re-use. See permissions. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Jul 27, 2026; 18(7): 119397
Published online Jul 27, 2026. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v18.i7.119397
Clinical and radiomic characteristics of transarterial chemoembolization combined with immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma
Qian Xia, Wei Shan, Hao Yan, Department of Interventional Vascular Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang 110001, Liaoning Province, China
ORCID number: Qian Xia (0009-0009-1768-8175); Hao Yan (0009-0006-7682-1835).
Co-first authors: Qian Xia and Wei Shan.
Author contributions: Xia Q and Shan W designed the research, collected and organized clinical and imaging data, performed statistical analysis, and drafted the initial manuscript, they contributed equally to this article, they are the co-first authors of this manuscript; Yan H reviewed the research protocol and conducted quality control; and all authors reviewed the manuscript and approved the final submitted version.
Institutional review board statement: This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, approval No. Y(2026)209.
Informed consent statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Data sharing statement: No additional data are available.
Corresponding author: Hao Yan, Associate Chief Physician, Research Fellow, Department of Interventional Vascular Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, No. 83 Wenhua Road, Shenhe District, Shenyang 110001, Liaoning Province, China. yanhaobzjr@163.com
Received: March 17, 2026
Revised: April 10, 2026
Accepted: May 18, 2026
Published online: July 27, 2026
Processing time: 132 Days and 1.3 Hours

Abstract
BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Intermediate- to advanced-stage HCC patients are commonly administered transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). Recently, TACE combined with immunotherapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy; however, there is substantial interindividual heterogeneity in treatment responses. Therefore, developing efficient predictive biomarkers for therapeutic success is essential for attaining individualized therapy.

AIM

To assess the short-term efficacy of TACE in conjunction with immunotherapy against TACE monotherapy in patients with intermediate-advanced HCC, while also preliminarily investigating the clinical, serological, and radiomic characteristics associated with the efficacy of the combination treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 120 intermediate-advanced HCC patients admitted to our hospital between January 2023 and January 2025. Of these patients, 60 received TACE + immunotherapy (combined group), while 60 received TACE monotherapy (TACE group). The objective response rate, disease control rate at 3 months post-treatment, and changes in serum levels of tumor markers (α-L-fucosidase, alpha-fetoprotein, carbohydrate antigen 19-9), angiogenic factors (hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, basic fibroblast growth factor), and apoptosis-related molecules (cysteine aspartic protease-3, survivin) before and after treatment were compared between the two groups. Based on the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors, the combination cohort was further stratified into responders (complete response/partial response) and non-responders (stable disease/progressive disease). The differences and correlations between baseline clinical characteristics and radiomic features (e.g., entropy, gray-level variance, texture features) were acquired from pre-treatment computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging scans.

RESULTS

The objective response rate (36.7% vs 23.3%) and disease control rate (76.7% vs 60.0%) in the combination group were substantially higher than those in the TACE group (both P < 0.05). The combination group had superior efficacy in reducing serum tumor marker levels, suppressing angiogenic factors, upregulating cysteine aspartic protease-3 expression, and downregulating survivin expression relative to the TACE group (all P < 0.05). Moreover, the combination group’s radiomic features (including gray-level co-occurrence matrix contrast, arterial-phase entropy, and gray-level variance) were significantly correlated with clinical features, including tumor volume, number, and location (all P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics between responders and non-responders.

CONCLUSION

TACE + immunotherapy indicated improved short-term efficacy and serological molecules modulation compared with TACE monotherapy in intermediate-advanced HCC patients. Radiomic features can quantitatively reflect tumor heterogeneity and correlate with basic tumor characteristics, indicating their potential as non-invasive biomarkers. However, the predictive value of these radiomic characteristics for the effectiveness of combination therapy necessitates more validation in prospective investigations.

Key Words: Hepatocellular carcinoma; Transarterial chemoembolization; Immunotherapy; Therapeutic efficacy; Radiomics; Prediction

Core Tip: Transarterial chemoembolization + immunotherapy co-treatment can significantly improve short-term objective response rate and disease control rate in intermediate-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients and more effectively regulate relevant serum biomarkers. Radiomic features extracted from pre-treatment imaging can serve as a potential strategy for constructing personalized efficacy prediction models.



INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common primary liver malignancies worldwide and represents a leading cause of cancer-related mortality[1]. Due to the lack of specific early symptoms, most patients are diagnosed at an intermediate or advanced stage, at which point curative treatments such as surgical resection or liver transplantation are no longer feasible[2,3].

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is currently recommended as a standard treatment for intermediate-stage HCC patients[4]. TACE exerts its antitumor effect by delivering chemotherapeutic agents directly into the tumor-feeding arteries while simultaneously embolizing the blood supply, resulting in ischemic necrosis of tumor tissue. However, its clinical efficacy remains limited due to tumor heterogeneity, incomplete embolization, and the potential induction of hypoxia-related angiogenesis[5,6].

In recent years, cancer immunotherapy, particularly immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed death-1 and programmed death ligand-1, has significantly improved the systemic treatment landscape of HCC. TACE-induced tumor necrosis may increase tumor antigen release and promote immune activation, providing a theoretical basis for synergistic effects in combination with immunotherapy[7].

This study retrospectively analyzed patients with intermediate to advanced HCC treated between January 2023 and January 2025, aiming to evaluate the short-term efficacy of TACE combined with immunotherapy compared with TACE monotherapy. This also explores potential clinical, serological, and radiomic predictors of treatment response.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study population

This study retrospectively analyzed HCC patients treated at the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command between January 2023 and January 2025. Of these, 60 patients received TACE + immunotherapy, and the other 60 received TACE monotherapy. Clinical data, laboratory test results, and imaging data of all patients were retrieved from the hospital electronic medical record system and picture archiving and communication system. All participants willingly selected their treatment regimens and provided informed consent to participate in the trial. This study was authorized by the Institutional Review Board of our hospital.

Inclusion criteria: (1) Patients with a confirmed HCC diagnosis by histopathology or clinical diagnosis based on imaging features combined with clinical manifestations; (2) Patients who received TACE + immunotherapy as the primary treatment; (3) Patients who underwent enhanced computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging completed before treatment, with image quality meeting the requirements for subsequent analysis; (4) Patients who had complete preoperative clinical data and laboratory test results; and (5) Patients who completed at least one post-treatment imaging follow-up to enable efficacy evaluation.

Exclusion criteria: (1) Patients with other types of malignant tumors or with extrahepatic metastases as the primary lesions; (2) Patients with a history of liver transplantation or other systemic anti-tumor therapies; (3) Patients with incomplete imaging data or poor image quality precluding further analysis; (4) Patients with missing key clinical or laboratory data; and (5) Patients with incomplete follow-up data that cannot support treatment efficacy assessment.

Study design

All enrolled patients received routine examinations before therapy, including the collection of demographic data, laboratory analyses, and imaging studies. TACE procedures were conducted by interventional physicians with considerable clinical experience. Furthermore, immunotherapy was administered in accordance with established clinical standards. Moreover, a retrospective analysis was performed to collect the preoperative clinical and imaging attributes of the patients. Based on post-treatment imaging evaluations, patients were categorized as treatment responders or non-responders, and the differences between these groups were analyzed.

Detection of laboratory indicators

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was performed to assess the serum levels of α-L-fucosidase (AFU), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), cysteine aspartic protease (caspase)-4, and survivin.

Treatment and response evaluation

Treatment responses were assessed using imaging examinations per the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors[1]. Complete response (CR) was defined as the elimination of all target lesions, normalization of blood tumor marker levels, and maintaining this state for a minimum of 4 weeks. A partial response (PR) is defined as a minimum 30% reduction in the aggregate maximum diameters of target lesions, and a decrease in serum tumor marker levels, maintained for at least 4 weeks. Stable disease (SD) was characterized by a decrease in lesion size that did not meet the criteria for PR or an increase that did not meet the criteria for progressive disease, with no substantial alterations in serum tumor marker levels. Progressive disease was characterized by at least 20% increase in the aggregate maximum diameters of target lesions, the appearance of additional lesions, or a persistent increase in serum tumor marker levels.

The objective response rate (ORR) was determined as the ratio of patients attaining CR and PR to the total trial population. The disease control rate (DCR) was determined as the ratio of patients attaining CR, PR, and SD to the total trial population[8].

Clinical and laboratory indicators included patient age, gender, AFP level, maximum tumor diameter, number of tumors, Child-Pugh classification, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and albumin-bilirubin score.

Radiomic variables derived from pre-treatment imaging data were collected from the tumor regions of interest, primarily including entropy (indicative of tumor textural complexity), gray level variance, and tumor morphological characteristics (e.g., sphericity). These variables were employed to evaluate intratumoral heterogeneity and the morphological features of the tumors.

Indicates

Primary endpoints included ORR and DCR at 3 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in serum tumor markers, angiogenic factors, and apoptosis-related biomarkers.

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were carried out using statistical software. Based on normality tests, continuous variables were reported as mean ± SD or median (interquartile range). Intergroup comparisons were assessed via an independent-samples t-test or a Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages, and their intergroup comparisons were evaluated by the χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test. All statistical tests were two-sided, and a P value < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant.

Ethics statement

This is a retrospective study, and all the data were acquired from previously collected clinical records. The patients’ personal information was kept confidential, and the study protocol was authorized by the Institutional Review Board of our hospital. Furthermore, the requirement for individual informed consent was waived.

RESULTS
Baseline characteristics

Baseline characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1. In the combination group, male patients accounted for 47.44%, whereas in the TACE group, the proportion was 57.14%, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.310). The mean age difference between the two groups was under 2 years (59.14 ± 8.06 years vs 57.93 ± 7.01 years, t = 0.821, P = 0.413). The duration of hepatitis B virus infection was slightly prolonged in the observation group (19.22 ± 2.41 years vs 17.01 ± 3.12 years), although the difference lacked statistical significance (t = 3.214, P = 0.142). The tumor size was typically greater in the observation group (4.39 ± 2.50 cm vs 3.99 ± 1.24 cm, t = 2.581, P = 0.093). The tumor was primarily located in the right hepatic lobe, with equivalent proportions of left lobe, right lobe, and multifocal tumors between the two groups (χ2 = 1.892, P = 0.059).

Table 1 Basic data of the patients, n (%)/mean ± SD.
Variables
Combination group
TACE group
t/χ2
P value
Gender (male/female)37 (47.44)/41 (52.56)24 (57.14)/18 (42.86)1.0290.310
Mean age (years)59.14 ± 8.0657.93 ± 7.010.8210.413
Duration of hepatitis B infection (year)19.22 ± 2.4117.01 ± 3.123.2140.142
Tumor size (cm)4.39 ± 2.503.99 ± 1.242.5810.093
Tumor location (left lobe/right lobe/multifocal, %)33.62/59.18/7.20%32.12/59.18/8.70%1.8920.059
Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy between the two groups

Imaging assessment of all measurable lesions was conducted 3 months post-treatment, in accordance with the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. There were no cases of CR in either the TACE group or the combination group. The PR rate was 23.3% (14/60) in the TACE group, which increased to 36.7% (22/60) in the combination group, demonstrating a significant increase in the proportion of patients with a ≥ 30% reduction in the sum of the maximal tumor diameters after combined therapy. The percentage of SD decreased from 36.7% (22/60) in the TACE group to 20.0% (12/60) in the combination group, although the percentage of progressive disease remained comparable across the two groups (40.0% vs 43.3%). Figure 1 illustrates comparative imaging. Based on the above data, the ORR in the combination group reached 36.7%, which was significantly higher than the 23.3% in the TACE group (χ2 = 24.144, P = 0.001). Further, the DCR improved from 60.0% to 76.7%, and the difference was significant (P = 0.001) (Table 2).

Figure 1
Figure 1 Comparative imaging of the two patient groups before and after treatment. A: Preoperative transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with immunotherapy; B: Postoperative TACE combined with immunotherapy; C: Preoperative TACE monotherapy; D: Postoperative TACE monotherapy.
Table 2 Comparison of efficacy between the two groups, n (%).
Group
Case
CR
PR
SD
PD
ORR
DCR
TACE group600 (0.0)14 (23.3)22 (36.7)24 (40.0)14 (23.3)36 (60.0)
Combination group600 (0.0)22 (36.7)12 (20.0)26 (43.3)22 (36.7)46 (76.7)
χ2------24.144
P value------0.001
Comparison of serological indicators before and after treatment between the two groups

The baseline serum marker levels were all comparable between the two groups before treatment (P > 0.05; Table 3). Post-treatment, although the levels of AFU, AFP, and CA19-9 decreased in the TACE group, they remained high (238.7 ± 21.8 U/L, 463.2 ± 25.1 ng/mL, 42.1 ± 6.8 KU/L, respectively). The reduction in levels was significantly more pronounced in the combination group, with the three markers decreased to 185.3 ± 19.2 U/L, 351.6 ± 22.0 ng/mL, and 28.4 ± 6.1 KU/L, all considerably lower than those in the TACE group at the same time point (P < 0.05). The data indicate that TACE + immunotherapy can more efficiently lower serum tumor marker levels.

Table 3 Comparison of serum tumor marker levels between the two groups, mean ± SD.
Group
Case
AFU (U/L)
AFP (ng/mL)
CA19-9 (KU/L)
TACE groupBefore treatment60282.4 ± 21.8574.5 ± 50.9
After treatment60238.7 ± 20.1463.2 ± 25.1
Combination groupBefore treatment60283.1 ± 22.0573.8 ± 51.4
After treatment60185.3 ± 19.2a351.6 ± 22.0a
Comparison of angiogenic factor levels before and after treatment between the two groups

It was observed that before the treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline levels of the four angiogenic factors between the two groups (P > 0.05; Table 4). Post-treatment, the concentrations of HGF, VEGF, PDGF, and bFGF in the TACE group decreased to 95.3 ± 8.9 ng/mL, 433.2 ± 41.8 ng/L, 1964.5 ± 314.2 ng/L, and 141.8 ± 15.5 ng/L, respectively, suggesting a slight decrease in magnitude. In the combination group, the reduction was more significant, with the four markers decreased to 71.8 ± 7.8 ng/mL, 304.1 ± 36.1 ng/L, 1508.2 ± 301.7 ng/L, and 101.6 ± 14.3 ng/L, respectively, all of which were much lower than those in the TACE group at the same time point (P < 0.05). The results demonstrate that TACE + immunotherapy can more efficiently inhibit the levels of angiogenic factors.

Table 4 Comparison of serum angiogenic factor levels between the two groups, mean ± SD.
Group
Case
HGF (ng/mL)
VEGF (ng/L)
PDGF (ng/L)
bFGF (ng/L)
TACE groupBefore treatment60144.2 ± 16.8463.1 ± 54.72155.8 ± 350.5
After treatment6095.3 ± 8.9433.2 ± 41.81964.5 ± 314.2
Combination groupBefore treatment60143.5 ± 15.9462.3 ± 56.22156.5 ± 352.1
After treatment6071.8 ± 7.8a304.1 ± 36.1a1508.2 ± 301.7a
Comparison of apoptosis-related molecule levels before and after treatment between the two groups

The data revealed no statistically significant differences in the pre-treatment serum levels of caspase-3 and survivin between the two groups (P > 0.05;Table 5). However, after TACE monotherapy, caspase-3 levels increased from 28.4 ± 4.5 ng/mL to 37.5 ± 5.4 ng/mL, whereas survivin levels reduced from 33.8 ± 4.7 ng/mL to 26.3 ± 3.8 ng/mL, indicating a slight increase in apoptotic activity. In the combination group, the caspase-3 level improved to 44.3 ± 5.7 ng/mL post-treatment, whilst the survivin level decreased substantially to 21.3 ± 3.9 ng/mL; both metrics surpassed those observed in the TACE group at the same time point (P < 0.05). The results indicate that TACE + immunotherapy more efficiently activates the caspase-3-mediated apoptotic pathway and inhibits survivin expression, thus augmenting the antitumor effect.

Table 5 Expression levels of serum apoptosis molecules before and after treatment in the two groups, mean ± SD.
Group
Case
Caspase-3 (ng/mL)
Survivin (ng/mL)
TACE groupBefore treatment6028.4 ± 4.5
After treatment6037.5 ± 5.4
Combination groupBefore treatment6028.0 ± 5.0
After treatment6044.3 ± 5.7a
Correlation between radiomic features and clinical characteristics

Correlation analysis of radiomic features and clinical characteristics in 120 HCC patients indicated significant associations between certain radiomic characteristics and clinical parameters, including tumor size, location, and quantity (P < 0.05). The principal findings are detailed in Table 6.

Table 6 Correlation analysis between radiomics features and clinical features.
Clinical features
Radiomic features
Correlation coefficient (r)
P value
Tumor volumeGLCM contrast-0.43< 0.01
Tumor volumeDCE-MRI arterial phase entropy0.48< 0.01
Tumor locationGLRLM SRHGE0.40< 0.05
Tumor locationGLDM gray-level non-uniformity0.45< 0.01
Tumor numberGray-level variance of texture features0.52< 0.01
Tumor numberGLRLM LRLGE-0.46< 0.01
DISCUSSION

HCC ranks among the most prevalent causes of cancer-related mortality globally. In intermediate to advanced HCC patients, treatment options are substantially limited, and the prognosis is unfavorable. TACE, a frequently employed localized therapy for unresectable HCC, exhibits anticancer efficacy by inhibiting the tumor’s blood supply and administering medicines directly at the site. In recent years, systemic therapy, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, has transformed the therapeutic paradigm of HCC. TACE-induced tumor cell necrosis may theoretically release antigens and modify the tumor immune microenvironment, thus producing a synergistic impact with immunotherapy. This retrospective study analyzed the efficacy difference between TACE + immunotherapy and TACE monotherapy. Furthermore, the clinical and radiomic characteristics associated with efficacy were also preliminarily investigated to provide a basis for optimizing individualized treatment strategies for patients with intermediate-advanced HCC.

The data showed that TACE + immunotherapy achieved significantly higher short-term ORR and DCR than TACE monotherapy. The ORR in the combined treatment group was 36.7%, substantially higher than the 23.3% observed in the TACE group. Furthermore, the DCR also increased from 60.0% to 76.7%. This outcome corresponds to the findings of other recent prospective and retrospective investigations, validating the synergistic benefit of combination treatment in intermediate-advanced HCC[9]. Using both local control and systemic immune activation, combination treatment can more effectively inhibit tumor growth and provide enhanced therapeutic advantages to patients[10]. Moreover, the decrease in AFU, AFP, and CA19-9 levels in the combination treatment group post-treatment was considerably higher than that observed in the TACE-monotherapy group. These indicators are closely associated with tumor load, degree of differentiation, and prognosis of HCC. Their substantial decrease indicates that combination therapy may more efficiently suppress tumor activity or decrease the quantity of tumor cells[11]. Similarly, the analysis of angiogenic factors revealed that the levels of HGF, VEGF, PDGF, and bFGF in the combination treatment group post-treatment were significantly lower than those in the TACE group[12]. Angiogenesis is a crucial mechanism in the initiation, progression, and metastasis of HCC. TACE can induce ischemia and hypoxia, which could result in a temporary upregulation of some pro-angiogenic factors[13]. Immunotherapy, particularly programmed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 inhibitors, has demonstrated anti-angiogenic properties[14]. The findings of the present study indicated that the combined regimen could more effectively reduce the secretion of these factors, suggesting that combined treatment may have a more significant and persistent impact on blocking tumor blood supply and inhibiting tumor neovascularization, which might indicate its enhanced efficacy.

The analysis of apoptosis-related molecules revealed that the combined therapy group had significantly higher serum caspase-3 levels and decreased survivin levels compared to the TACE group following treatment. Caspase-3 is a crucial protease in the execution phase of apoptosis, and its elevated levels signify increased activation of the apoptotic pathway. Survivin, an essential anti-apoptotic protein, is downregulated in expression, facilitating the onset of cell apoptosis[15]. This finding indicates that TACE in conjunction with immunotherapy can more efficiently activate the intrinsic apoptotic pathway and suppress apoptosis resistance, improving the direct cytotoxic effect on tumor cells, providing molecular biological evidence for the synergistic mechanism of combined treatment[16].

This study also performed the correlation analysis between radiomic features and clinical characteristics. Preliminary data revealed that texture features reflecting tumor heterogeneity (such as gray-level co-occurrence matrix contrast and entropy) were significantly correlated with tumor volume, whereas certain morphological and gray-level distribution features (such as gray-level run-length matrix short-run high-gray-level emphasis and gray-level dependence matrix gray-level non-uniformity) were correlated with tumor location. The gray-level variation and long-run low-gray-level focus of textural features were significantly correlated with tumor quantity. The findings indicate that radiomic features derived from conventional computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging can quantitatively represent the biological parameters of HCC, such as volume, location, quantity, and internal heterogeneity, and may function as non-invasive biomarkers[17]. This study did not perform a multivariate modeling analysis of these traits in relation to treatment efficacy; however, the previous literature suggests that HCC characterized by high tumor heterogeneity has poor treatment response and a worse prognosis[18-20]. Therefore, subsequent research should integrate these prospective radiomic features with clinical and serological markers to develop a nomogram or machine learning model to predict the efficacy of TACE + immunotherapy, thus allowing accurate identification of patients with significant benefits before treatment and mitigating the economic burden and potential adverse effects associated with ineffective interventions. This study provides preliminary evidence supporting the integration of radiomics into treatment decision-making for HCC.

Limitations

Despite these findings, several limitations should be acknowledged: (1) It is a single-center, retrospective study with a relatively limited sample size, which may have selection bias; (2) The immunotherapy regimens (drug types, courses of treatment) were not uniform, which may have a certain impact on efficacy analysis; (3) The correlation analysis for radiomic features was preliminary and lacked verification with external data sets. Moreover, its predictive efficacy warrants further validation in prospective, large-sample studies; and (4) The follow-up time of this study was short, and only short-term efficacy (3 months after treatment) was evaluated. The effect of combined treatment on the long-term survival of patients, including overall survival and progression-free survival, requires extended follow-up data for clarification.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that for intermediate to advanced HCC patients, TACE in conjunction with immunotherapy improved short-term ORR and DCR, while also decreasing serum tumor markers, inhibiting angiogenic factors, and modulating apoptosis-related molecules, relative to TACE monotherapy. Furthermore, radiomic properties characterizing tumor heterogeneity and morphology exhibit substantial correlations with clinical characteristics, providing a basis for the development of personalized efficacy prediction models. In the future, multi-center, prospective, large-sample randomized controlled trials, integrating multi-omics data (radiomics, genomics, immune microenvironment, etc.) should be performed to elucidate the synergistic mechanisms of combined therapies, develop and validate reliable efficacy prediction tools, and ultimately achieve precise and personalized comprehensive treatment for HCC.

References
1.  Ganesan P, Kulik LM. Hepatocellular Carcinoma: New Developments. Clin Liver Dis. 2023;27:85-102.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 389]  [Cited by in RCA: 341]  [Article Influence: 113.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (12)]
2.  Alawyia B, Constantinou C. Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Narrative Review on Current Knowledge and Future Prospects. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2023;24:711-724.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 17]  [Cited by in RCA: 142]  [Article Influence: 47.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (2)]
3.  Chang Y, Jeong SW, Young Jang J, Jae Kim Y. Recent Updates of Transarterial Chemoembolilzation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:8165.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 283]  [Cited by in RCA: 267]  [Article Influence: 44.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (7)]
4.  Liu B, Zhang Y, Chen H, Li W, Tsochatzis E. The combination of transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE) and thermal ablation versus TACE alone for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022;1:CD013345.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 6]  [Cited by in RCA: 18]  [Article Influence: 4.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Zhou H, Song T. Conversion therapy and maintenance therapy for primary hepatocellular carcinoma. Biosci Trends. 2021;15:155-160.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 160]  [Cited by in RCA: 136]  [Article Influence: 27.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (6)]
6.  Gong A, Li X. The efficacy and safety of Apatinib combined with TACE in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2022;20:69.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Zhang YQ, Zhao F, Song L, Gan HY, Xie XF. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Endostar Combined With Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE) Versus TACE Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. 2017;22:883-891.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 1]  [Cited by in RCA: 4]  [Article Influence: 0.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Wang Y, Deng B. Hepatocellular carcinoma: molecular mechanism, targeted therapy, and biomarkers. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2023;42:629-652.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 372]  [Cited by in RCA: 308]  [Article Influence: 102.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (1)]
9.  Tan J, Fan W, Liu T, Zhu B, Liu Y, Wang S, Wu J, Liu J, Zou F, Wei J, Liu L, Zhang X, Zhuang J, Wang Y, Lin H, Huang X, Chen S, Kuang M, Li J. TREM2(+) macrophages suppress CD8(+) T-cell infiltration after transarterial chemoembolisation in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2023;79:126-140.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 187]  [Cited by in RCA: 171]  [Article Influence: 57.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (2)]
10.  Singal AG, Kudo M, Bruix J. Breakthroughs in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Therapies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023;21:2135-2149.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 134]  [Cited by in RCA: 130]  [Article Influence: 43.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Xu XY, Wang Z, Liu CY, Wu HD, Hu ZX, Lin YY, Zhang S, Shen J, Zhong BY, Zhu XL. Immune Indicator Changes in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing TACE Plus ICIs and Anti-VEGF Antibodies/TKIs: A Prognostic Biomarker Analysis. J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 2024;11:2019-2032.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in RCA: 6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (5)]
12.  Hao L, Li S, Ye F, Wang H, Zhong Y, Zhang X, Hu X, Huang X. The current status and future of targeted-immune combination for hepatocellular carcinoma. Front Immunol. 2024;15:1418965.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 29]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
13.  Llovet JM, De Baere T, Kulik L, Haber PK, Greten TF, Meyer T, Lencioni R. Locoregional therapies in the era of molecular and immune treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;18:293-313.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 855]  [Cited by in RCA: 747]  [Article Influence: 149.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (7)]
14.  Li B, Li Y, Zhou H, Xu Y, Cao Y, Cheng C, Peng J, Li H, Zhang L, Su K, Xu Z, Hu Y, Lu J, Lu Y, Qian L, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Liu Q, Xie Y, Guo S, Mehal WZ, Yu D. Multiomics identifies metabolic subtypes based on fatty acid degradation allocating personalized treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2024;79:289-306.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 7]  [Cited by in RCA: 81]  [Article Influence: 40.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
15.  Pourbagheri-Sigaroodi A, Momeny M, Rezaei N, Fallah F, Bashash D. A Novel Prognostic Immune-related Gene Signature in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Through Bioinformatics and Experimental Approaches. Iran J Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2024;23:699-726.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
16.  Oura K, Morishita A, Tani J, Masaki T. Tumor Immune Microenvironment and Immunosuppressive Therapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:5801.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Full Text (PDF)]  [Cited by in Crossref: 378]  [Cited by in RCA: 346]  [Article Influence: 69.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (5)]
17.  Chan MV, Huo YR, Trieu N, Mitchelle A, George J, He E, Lee AU, Chang J, Yang J. Noncontrast MRI for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - A Potential Surveillance Tool? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;20:44-56.e2.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 19]  [Cited by in RCA: 49]  [Article Influence: 12.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
18.  Zhang LX, Tang A. Abbreviated MRI for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance: Counterpoint-Hepatobiliary Contrast Agents Improve Detection and Characterization. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2024;222:e2330140.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in RCA: 3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Chen BB, Shih TT. DCE-MRI in hepatocellular carcinoma-clinical and therapeutic image biomarker. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:3125-3134.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]
20.  Karadag Soylu N. Update on Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Brief Review from Pathologist Standpoint. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2020;51:1176-1186.  [RCA]  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Full Text]  [Cited by in Crossref: 13]  [Cited by in RCA: 25]  [Article Influence: 5.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
Footnotes

Peer review: Externally peer reviewed.

Peer-review model: Single blind

Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology

Country of origin: China

Peer-review report’s classification

Scientific quality: Grade B, Grade C

Novelty: Grade B, Grade B

Creativity or innovation: Grade B, Grade C

Scientific significance: Grade C, Grade C

P-Reviewer: Beatriz Delprato C, MD, Argentina; Mlak R, PhD, Poland S-Editor: Bai Y L-Editor: A P-Editor: Yang YQ

Write to the Help Desk