Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26374242›Full record

ArticleHPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association2015

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer: distinguishing molecular profiles to guide potential therapy.

Mary Potkonjak, John T Miura, Kiran K Turaga, Fabian M Johnston, Susan Tsai, Kathleen K Christians, T Clark Gamblin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Downregulation of MGMT promotes proliferation of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma by regulating p21.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mary PotkonjakDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
John T MiuraDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Kiran K TuragaDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Fabian M JohnstonDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Susan TsaiDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Kathleen K ChristiansDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
T Clark GamblinDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Medical College of Wisconsin · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChemotherapy regimens for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and gallbladder adenocarcinoma (GC) remain interchangeable; however, response rates are frequently suboptimal. Biomarkers from ICC and GC patients were interrogated to identify actionable differences with potential therapeutic implications.

methodsFrom 2009 to 2012, pathological specimens from 217 ICC and 28 GC patients referred to Caris Life Sciences were evaluated. Specific testing by immunohistochemical analysis for 17 different biomarkers was performed.

resultsIn the collective cohort (n = 245), actionable targets included: 95% low thymidylate synthase (TS), 82% low ribonucleotide reductase subunit M (RMM) 1 and 74% low excision repair cross complementation group (ERCC) 1, indicating potential susceptibility to fluoropyrimidines/capecitabine, gemcitabine and platinum agents, respectively. Additional targets included TOPO1 (53.3% high, Irinotecan), MGMT (50.3% low, temozolomide), TOP2A (33% high, anthracyclines) and PGP (30.1% low, taxanes). Subgroup analysis by tumour origin demonstrated a differential biomarker expression pattern with a higher frequency of ICC tumours showing low levels of TS (99% versus 72%, P < 0.01), and RRM1 (85% versus 64%, P = 0.02) when compared with GC. Conversely a greater frequency of GC demonstrated high levels of TOPO1 (76% versus 50%, P = 0.02) versus ICC, indicating a potential increased benefit from irinotecan. DISCUSSION: Differences in the molecular profiles between ICC and GC provide evidence that the two are distinct diseases, requiring different treatment strategies to optimize a response.

Indexed as

ImmunohistochemistryMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesAdenocarcinomaAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBile Duct NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorCholangiocarcinomaDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleGallbladder NeoplasmsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMolecular Targeted TherapyPatient SelectionPredictive Value of TestsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID26374242
PMCPMC4644364
OpenAlexW1892546454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.