Cited by 154Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisComputational Drug Discovery MethodsCancer Genomics and Diagnostics

Harnessing big ‘omics’ data and AI for drug discovery in hepatocellular carcinoma

Open access
Chen, Bin, Garmire, Lana, Calvisi, Diego F., Chua, Mei-Sze, Kelley, Robin K., Chen, Xin·2020·Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common form of primary adult liver cancer. After nearly a decade with sorafenib as the only approved treatment, multiple new agents have demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials, including the targeted therapies regorafenib, lenvatinib and cabozantinib, the anti-angiogenic antibody ramucirumab, and the immune checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Although these agents offer new promise to patients with HCC, the optimal choice and sequence of therapies remains unknown and without established biomarkers, and many patients do not respond to treatment. The advances and the decreasing costs of molecular measurement technologies enable profiling of HCC molecular features (such as genome, transcriptome, proteome and metabolome) at different levels, including bulk tissues, animal models and single cells. The release of such data sets to the public enhances the ability to search for information from these legacy studies and provides the opportunity to leverage them to understand HCC mechanisms, rationally develop new therapeutics and identify candidate biomarkers of treatment response. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of public data sets related to HCC and discuss how emerging artificial intelligence methods can be applied to identify new targets and drugs as well as to guide therapeutic choices for improved HCC treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41575-019-0240-9

Cites

133 of 133 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Heterogeneity, or diverse cell populations within diseased tissue, is the leading cause of treatment failure for many complex diseases and a major obstacle to precision medicine.

    “Heterogeneity, or more specifically, the diverse cell populations within the diseased tissue, is the leading cause of treatment failure for many complex diseases, such as cancers1, Alzheimer’s disease2, stroke3, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)4, etc., as well as a major obstacle to successful precision medicine5–7.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, B., Garmire, L., Calvisi, D. F., Chua, M.-S., Kelley, R. K., & Chen, X.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Sassari (IT)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Bin
Venue
Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Published
2020-01-03
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
238-251
ISSN
  • 1759-5045 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-5053
OpenAlex
W2997782431
Cited by
154
References
133
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 17
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Regensburg Publication Server (University of Regensburg) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • UnissResearch (Università degli Studi di Sassari) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (R21TR001743)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P20GM103457)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (K01ES025434, K01ES028047)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM012907, R01LM012373)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD084633)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Keywords
hepatocellular carcinoma, drug discovery, artificial intelligence, public datasets, drug target identification, treatment response biomarkers, single-cell profiling, multi-omics integration, precision oncology
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Animals, Antineoplastic Agents, Artificial Intelligence, Disease Models, Animal, Carcinoma, Hepatocellular, Humans, Liver Neoplasms, Biomarkers, Genomics, Cell Line, Tumor, Drug Discovery, Translational Research, Biomedical, Precision Medicine, Molecular Targeted Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review