This is an updated review of screening, early diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma, focusing on the advancements occurred in the last years and highlighting the challenges in clinical research.Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is nowadays the sixth most frequent cancer worldwide with up to 740,000 new cases diagnosed each year, and it is the third most prevalent cause of cancer-relateddeath worldwide (1). This neoplasm usually appears linked to an underlying liver disease, being one of the most relevant causes of death in patients diagnosed of liver cirrhosis (2,3). In the last years, important advancements in terms of diagnosis, staging and treatment of HCC, improving the management and outcome of the disease, have been made (4-7). Despite the fact that these improvements have absolutely changed natural history of HCC, there are several areas that still need further advancements.The aim of this document is to discuss some controversial aspects, which in our opinion constitute real challenges in clinical research of HCC.Key words: Hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatic oncology. Sorafenib. Transarterial chemoembolization. AFP.
IMPROVING EARLY DIAGNOSISFrom the basis that the only possibility to offer and apply treatments with curative intention is being able to diagnose HCC at early stages, when there are not cancer related symptoms. Since this option is only feasible if screening is performed in population at risk, scientific guidelines recommend performing abdominal ultrasonography (US) in every patient with liver cirrhosis. Despite the recommendation of HCC screening by the Spanish guidelines (4), one registry study performed in Spain which included 62 centers and 705 patients diagnosed of HCC within a period of time of 4 months showed that just 47% of HCC patients were diagnosed in the setting of surveillance and less than a half were diagnosed at early stage (8).This data shows that early diagnosis, a key issue to be able to significantly reduce HCC-related mortality, is one of the most relevant issues that deserve further efforts from scientific community. Aiming to evaluate which were the causes of screening program fail in the United States of America, Singal et al. evaluated 1,005 patients included in the HALT-C prospective study. A third part of patients did not adhere to an adequate screening program and, in 70% of cases that were diagnosed at an advanced stage, the main reason was the absence of detection in US (9).With the aim of improving detection rate, it is crucial to establish formative programs in order to certify the capability of being able to carry on this activity and it is necessary to use up-to-date ultrasonography scans in order to perform an optimal liver exploration. Tumor markers could be a useful tool to overcome theoretical limitations of US: its evaluation is not subjective, does not depend on the operator and it may be reproducible, as well as it is relatively cheap and a tool easy to access in areas with low monetary income. Regrettably, different tumor markers ev...