ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Forty-five-year trends in intra- and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: sex- and race-based insights.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stereotactic radiosurgery for spinal cholangiocarcinoma metastases: Clinical outcomes and the role of biologically effective dose thresholds.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Construction and validation of a novel prognostic model for postoperative patients with stage I intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a population-based study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Changing patterns of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer: A regional perspective from Northeastern Italy.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A comprehensive review of 45-year trends in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) in the United States has not been published. Given their rising incidence, our study aimed to analyze trends in incidence and survival, comparing ICC and ECC. Methods: We extracted a 45-year dataset (1975-2020) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Age-adjusted incidence rates were calculated using SEERStat®. Annual Percent Change (APC) was estimated via weighted least squares. Relative survival (1- and 5-year) was calculated using the Ederer II method and compared across sexes and races. Results: A significant rise in ICC and ECC incidence was observed in both sexes (APC 3.71 for ICC vs. 6.16 for ECC; P<0.001). In females, ECC incidence increased more than ICC (APC 5.96 vs. 4.09, P<0.05), whereas males showed a fluctuating ECC trend and a steady ICC rise. Survival rates significantly improved across all races and sexes (P<0.05). ICC survival rose from 17.45% to 41.41% (1-year) and 2.83% to 10.99% (5-year), while ECC increased from 30.33% to 41.12% (1-year) and 5.96% to 10.44% (5-year). Among white and other-race females, ECC showed less improvement than ICC. Black individuals lacked statistically significant data. Conclusions: Our study highlights disparities in ICC and ECC incidence, with higher rates in males, but better survival for ECC in males and ICC in females. The underrepresentation of Black individuals warrants further study to explore contributing factors such as risk, access to care, and treatment.
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.