Loading
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis / Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment · Journal article
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe · September 1, 2026
A consensus or society position rather than new primary data.
This is a narrative overview of HCC surveillance practice in Europe and globally, synthesizing current recommendations, implementation barriers, and emerging diagnostic approaches. It reflects expert consensus and highlights gaps in evidence quality and funding, rather than reporting new primary evidence of surveillance efficacy or comparative effectiveness.
Journal article. Patients at high risk of HCC, particularly those with cirrhosis; focus on European populations and comparison with Asian practice; mention of changing epidemiology including MASLD (metabolic-associated fatty liver disease).. Focus on Europe with comparison to Asian countries and global practice.
Biannual liver ultrasound with or without serum alpha-fetoprotein is the recommended surveillance approach for high-risk patients 75% of HCC cases are considered preventable, establishing the rationale for surveillance European surveillance uptake is suboptimal, with high rates of late-stage diagnosis and poor prognosis
No quantitative outcome data on surveillance efficacy, mortality reduction, or diagnostic accuracy reported
Clinicians should recognize that while surveillance is recommended by all professional societies, the underlying evidence base is debated and implementation in Europe remains suboptimal. The review highlights opportunities for improved risk stratification and emerging biomarker-based approaches, but emphasizes the need for stronger evidence, funding, and political commitment to close surveillance gaps, particularly in vulnerable and underserved populations.
A narrative review synthesizing surveillance recommendations, implementation challenges, and emerging approaches across geographies, offering expert consensus on HCC screening practice rather than primary evidence of clinical efficacy.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
Clinicians should recognize that while surveillance is recommended by all professional societies, the underlying evidence base is debated and implementation in Europe remains suboptimal. The review highlights opportunities for improved risk stratification and emerging biomarker-based approaches, but emphasizes the need for stronger evidence, funding, and political commitment to close surveillance gaps, particularly in vulnerable and underserved populations.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide and a public health concern, with 75% of cases considered preventable. Biannual liver ultrasound, with or without serum alpha-fetoprotein, is recommended as surveillance for patients at high risk of HCC. While the rationale for surveillance is strong and it continues to be recommended by all professional societies, there is ongoing debate about the strength and relevance of the evidence supporting surveillance for all populations with cirrhosis. European surveillance uptake is suboptimal, with high rates of late-stage diagnosis and subsequent poor prognosis. In this paper, we provide an overview of surveillance focusing on Europe and draw lessons from across the world. We discuss lessons learnt from the implementation of national and coordinated surveillance programmes in Asian countries and the global challenges resulting from the changing epidemiology of chronic liver disease, particularly the rise of MASLD. We consider the patient perspective, including stigma and inequalities in access and delivery. We explore emerging approaches to surveillance, including biomarkers, abbreviated MRI and risk-stratification, which may improve early diagnosis. Finally, we address the lack of funding and political willpower arising from an insufficient evidence base.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.