ArticleCancer biology & therapy2023
Genomic profiling, prognosis, and potential interventional targets in young and old patients with cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Cancer biology & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating Age-Related Differences in Survival Outcomes and Mutation Status of Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- The impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival and cancer-specific survival in patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma across different age groups: a population-based study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Epidemiology, clinical, molecular features, and prognosis of early-onset biliary tract cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026Article
- Analytical validation and clinical utilization of K-4CARE™: a comprehensive genomic profiling assay with personalized MRD detection.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular mechanisms behind potentially inferior prognosis of old cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) patients are unclear. Prevalence of interventional targets and the difference between young and old CCA patients are valuable for promising precision medicine. A total of 188 CCA patients with baseline tumor tissue samples were subgrouped into the young (≤45 years) and old (>45 years) sub-cohorts. Somatic and germline mutation profiles, differentially enriched genetic alterations, and actionable genetic alterations were compared. An external dataset was used for the validation of molecular features and the comparison of overall survival (OS). Compared to young patients,
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.