Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34080753›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2021

Comparative Genomic Analysis of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Biopsy Type, Ancestry, and Testing Patterns.

Mason A Israel, Natalie Danziger, Kimberly A McGregor, Karthikeyan Murugesan, Ole Gjoerup, Ethan S Sokol, Hanna Tukachinsky, Razelle Kurzrock, Shumei Kato, Jason K Sicklick and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cholangiocarcinoma: The era of liquid biopsy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Clinical Value of Liquid Biopsy in Patients with FGFR2 Fusion-Positive Cholangiocarcinoma During Targeted Therapy.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Immunology and immunotherapy of cholangiocarcinoma.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023
    Review
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mason A IsraelFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Natalie DanzigerFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Kimberly A McGregorFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Karthikeyan MurugesanFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Ole GjoerupFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Ethan S SokolFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Hanna TukachinskyFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Razelle KurzrockCenter for Personalized Cancer Therapy and Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California, USA.
Shumei KatoCenter for Personalized Cancer Therapy and Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California, USA.
Jason K SicklickCenter for Personalized Cancer Therapy and Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, California, USA.
Halla S NimeiriFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Geoffrey R OxnardFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Jeffrey S RossFoundation Medicine Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Foundation Medicine (United States)University of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAt diagnosis, the majority of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) present with advanced disease and a poor prognosis. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) early in the disease course may increase access to targeted therapies and clinical trials; however, unresolved issues remain surrounding the optimal biopsy type to submit for CGP. PATIENTS AND

methodsMutational frequencies between primary tumor biopsies (Pbx), metastatic biopsies (Mbx), and liquid biopsies (Lbx) in 1,632 patients with IHCC were compared.

resultsPotentially actionable alterations were found in 52%, 34%, and 35% of patients in the Pbx, Mbx, and Lbx cohorts, respectively. In Pbx, Mbx, and Lbx, FGFR2 rearrangements were found in 9%, 6%, and 4%, and IDH1 mutations were identified in 16%, 5%, and 9% patients, respectively. Moreover, alterations in FGFR2 and IDH1 were significantly associated with distinct ancestries, including 2.1-fold enrichment for FGFR2 rearrangements in patients with African ancestry and 1.5-fold enrichment for IDH1 mutations in patients with admixed American (Hispanic) ancestry. Finally, the publication of biomarker-driven clinical trials in IHCC correlated with changing CGP testing patterns. Significant correlations between patient characteristics and IHCC trial disclosures were observed, including a significant decrease from time between biopsy and CGP testing, and more frequent testing of primary versus metastatic samples.

conclusionOverall, because of the high likelihood of identifying actionable genomic alterations, CGP should be considered for the majority of patients with inoperable IHCC, and Lbx and Mbx can be considered as part of the diagnostic suite. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) should be considered for all patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) or suspected IHCC, as actionable alterations were commonly found in multiple genes and a wide variety of FGFR2 fusion partners were identified. The disclosure of IHCC trial data correlated with increased use of CGP, an encouraging trend that moves new therapeutic options forward for rare cancers with a rare biomarker. Although tissue from the primary lesion may identify actionable alterations at higher rates, CGP of a liquid biopsy or metastatic site can be considered, particularly if the primary tissue block is exhausted.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaBile Ducts, IntrahepaticBiopsyGenomicsHumansBile duct neoplasmsComparative genomicsIntrahepatic cholangiocarcinomaLiquid biopsy

Identifiers

PMID34080753
PMCPMC8417854
OpenAlexW3164366165

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.