Back to all available

Blood protein biomarkers in hepatocellular carcinoma: progress and challenges

molecular-biology
gastroenterology-and-hepatology
oncology
population-biology

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an important cause of cancer-related death. Due to the lack of typical clinical symptoms in early-stage HCC, most HCC patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage and have lost the opportunity of surgery, which results in a poor prognosis. Therefore, early detection and timely intervention are the most effective methods to reduce the mortality of HCC. Blood flows through different organs and tissues, and there are abundant tumor biomarkers in blood, which can provide real-time information for the early diagnosis and prognostic prediction of HCC, so blood tumor biomarkers have become an effective supplement to imaging technology. As the most ideal biomarkers for disease diagnosis, serum and plasma proteins have been the main focus for biomarker development. In this review, we summarized the research progress of potential blood protein biomarkers (tumor-associated antigens and tumor-associated autoantibodies) in HCC and discussed their obstacles in clinical translation.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].