ArticleBMC gastroenterology2020
Comparison of the effects of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy for resected biliary tract cancer.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Real-World Application of a Machine Learning-Based Early Recurrence Model for Guiding Adjuvant Chemotherapy Use in Patients with Gallbladder Cancer.Gut and liver · 2026Article
- Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy vs chemotherapy for resectable biliary tract cancer: a propensity score matching analysis based on the SEER database.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- The Potential Role of Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Microscopically Positive (R1) Surgical Margins after Resection of Cholangiocarcinoma.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Correction to: Comparison of the effects of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy for resected biliary tract cancer.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiliary tract cancers (BTC) have a poor prognosis even after curative resection because of frequent local and distant recurrences. Therefore, the importance of adjuvant therapy in BTC has been advocated to improve outcomes. However, the choice of adjuvant therapy is still controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of adjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and chemotherapy on resected BTC.
methodsWe analyzed 92 patients who had curatively resected BTC and had received adjuvant CCRT or chemotherapy from January 2000 to December 2017 at Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center.
resultsOf the patients, 46 received adjuvant CCRT and 46 received adjuvant chemotherapy. The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) for the adjuvant CCRT and chemotherapy groups were 13.8 and 11.2 months (p = 0.014), respectively. The median overall survival (OS) for the adjuvant CCRT and chemotherapy groups were 30.1 and 26.0 months (p = 0.222), respectively. Adjuvant CCRT had significantly better RFS and numerically higher OS than did chemotherapy. For subgroups with no lymph node (LN) involvement (RFS p = 0.006, OS p = 0.420) or negative resection margins (RFS p = 0.042, OS p = 0.098), adjuvant CCRT led to significantly longer RFS and numerically higher OS than did chemotherapy. For multivariate analysis, the pattern of adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy vs. CCRT, p = 0.004, HR 2.351), histologic grade (poor vs. well, p = 0.023, HR 4.793), and LN involvement (p = 0.028, HR 1.912) were the significant prognostic factors for RFS.
conclusionsOur study demonstrated the superiority of adjuvant CCRT over chemotherapy for improving RFS in curatively resected BTC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.