ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2025
FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement analysis in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma using DNA/RNA-based NGS and FISH.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding cholangiocarcinoma: molecular landscape, pathological classification, and challenges in biopsy diagnosis.Histopathology · 2026Review
- Evolving precision: Updates in targeted therapy for cholangiocarcinoma.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Review
- Article
- FGFR2 amplification and fusion identified by NGS align with FGFR2b overexpression.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Bicaudal‑C1 in Cancer: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Strategies Integrating Chinese and Western Medicine.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Review
- Harmonization trial ofPathologica · 2025Article
- Immunohistochemistry in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: histological subtyping and drug selection.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement benefit from targeted therapies, highlighting the need for reliable testing strategies to identify FGFR2 alterations. We assessed 226 iCCA cases using RNA-based NGS, DNA-based NGS, and break-apart FISH to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods in detecting FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement. The detection rates for FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement were 9.7% (22/226) for RNA-based NGS, 7.1% (16/226) for DNA-based NGS, and 10.2% (23/226) for FISH. Among the 26 FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement-positive cases identified by any method, only 15 (57.7%) were positive by all three techniques, yielding a concordance rate of 95.1% (215/226). RNA-based NGS confirmed oncogenic FGFR2 fusion in 81% (21/26) of positive cases and identified five novel oncogenic fusions. Thirty-five percent (6/17) of the partner genes were located on chromosome 10, with BICC1 being the most common fusion partner, while the rest were distributed across the other 9 chromosomes. FISH demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.2% and specificity of 98.5%, compared to oncogenic FGFR2 fusions confirmed by RNA-based NGS, while DNA-based NGS exhibited a sensitivity of 71.4% and specificity of 99.5%, identifying FGFR2 mutations in 4 cases. FGFR2-FISH positive cases displayed no significant heterogeneity in positive cell distribution. Oncogenic FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement was associated with small duct type iCCA, especially in cases with positive serum HBsAg and absent cholangiolocarcinoma components and peripheral liver steatosis. This study provides a comprehensive comparison of three assays for detecting FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement, along with clinicopathologic characterization of oncogenic FGFR2 fusion in iCCA.
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.