Tissue and blood-based predictive biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma immunotherapy: synthesis of 2023–2026 evidence and a proposed clinical integration framework
Aug 2026· Frontiers in Oncology· Vol 16· 0 citations· 51 references
Medicine
TL;DR
A narrative review synthesizes evidence published between 2020 and 2026 within a unified clinical framework not provided by prior reviews, and proposes an original biomarker-guided clinical algorithm, a comparative clinical readiness table, and a disease-continuum biomarker timeline as practical tools for clinicians and trialists.
Abstract
Atezolizumab-bevacizumab and durvalumab-tremelimumab have established immunotherapy as a first-line standard of care in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Yet, objective response rates (ORRs) remain confined to approximately 15-20%, and no validated predictive biomarker exists for patient selection. Unlike melanoma and lung cancer, conventional markers, including programmed death-ligand 1, microsatellite instability-high status, and tumor mutational burden, have not demonstrated reliable predictive value in HCC. Prior narrative reviews comprehensively catalogued the biomarker landscape through 2022 but predate a wave of clinically significant publications. This narrative review synthesizes evidence published between 2020 and 2026, with particular emphasis on 2023–2026 data, within a unified clinical framework not provided by prior reviews. We critically evaluate tissue-based biomarkers, including the AI-derived Atezolizumab-Bevacizumab Response Signature-Pathology model, spatial multiplex immunohistochemistry, and β-catenin mutational profiling; blood-based biomarkers encompassing circulating tumor DNA for minimal residual disease detection and peripheral immune phenotyping; and serum indices including the CRAFITY score and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Hepatitis B virus etiology and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis are discussed as biological modifiers of biomarker performance. We propose an original biomarker-guided clinical algorithm, a comparative clinical readiness table, and a disease-continuum biomarker timeline as practical tools for clinicians and trialists. Prospective biomarker-enrichment trials represent the most critical next step toward clinical translation.
BACKGROUND & AIMS
First-line nivolumab demonstrated a higher objective response rate (ORR) and favorable safety profile vs. sorafenib in advanced HCC in the phase 3 CheckMate 459 trial; however, no significant improvement in overall survival (OS) was observed. Here, we report exploratory biomarker analyses from CheckMa...
J. Neely, Jin Yao, M. Kudo et al.· JHEP Reports· 0 citations
It is argued that clinically useful signatures should be question-specific, stage-aware, and specimen-aware rather than universal multi-analyte panels and the need for prospective validation across clinically diverse populations is argued.
Ke Xu, Yu Liu, Yuan Peng et al.· Biofactors· 0 citations
High baseline circulating and tumor γδ T cells and early circulating CD8⁺PD-1⁺ T Cell expansion were associated with better outcome under AtezoBev, and an early induction of T cell-associated interferon-γ signaling at 3 weeks after the first injection of AtezoBev in patients that experienced response.
I. Galy-Fauroux, A. Asif-Laidin, M. Evain et al.· Clinical Cancer Research· 0 citations
Multibiomarker integration, supported by prospective validation and automated models, represents a promising approach to personalize treatment algorithms in early-stage TNBC, balancing efficacy and toxicity while guiding escalation and de-escalation strategies.
Federica Falcone, Erica Pietroluongo, P. De Placido· Current Opinion in Oncology· 0 citations
This review evaluates biomarkers at three clinical decision points: characterization of an indeterminate renal mass; recurrence-risk assessment and adjuvant treatment selection after nephrectomy; and first-line regimen selection in metastatic ccRCC.
Hadi Al Etri, Lea Al Zoghby, Mohamad Sadek Zoghbi et al.· Genes· 0 citations
Conventional genomic biomarkers remain central to current lung cancer treatment decisions because of their established clinical validity, and AI-based genomic models show promise for improving prediction and patient stratification, but their clinical utility remains uncertain without stronger prospective validation.
F. Siddique, M. Shehata, M. Ghazal et al.· Oncology Research· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.