ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2025
Safety and efficacy of pemigatinib in patients with cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2025. 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.
- Molecularly Guided Therapy and the Tumor Microenvironment in Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma: Current Evidence and Emerging Strategies Targeting FGFR2, HER2, and IDH1 with Pemigatinib, Zanidatamab, and Ivosidenib.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Progress in precision therapies for advanced cholangiocarcinoma: inhibitors of FGFR1-3.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Safety and efficacy of pemigatinib in patients with cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is an aggressive bile duct cancer with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. pemigatinib, a selective Methods: A comprehensive systematic review was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify studies investigating pemigatinib in CCA patients. Five studies involving a total of 459 patients met the inclusion criteria. Results: Pemigatinib demonstrated an overall objective response rate (ORR) of 43.2%, with a complete response (CR) achieved in 3% of patients. Stable disease was observed in 36.9% of patients, while 14.9% experienced disease progression. Median progression-free survival (PFS) varied across studies, due to differences in patient cohorts. The most common adverse effects (AEs) included hyperphosphatemia (48%), diarrhea (28.6%), fatigue (33%), and dry eyes (20.1%). Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that pemigatinib has modest therapeutic efficacy in CCA patients, with a considerable proportion achieving disease control. However, the ORR of less than 50% highlights the potential need for combination or sequential therapies to improve outcomes. Close monitoring and management of AEs, particularly hyperphosphatemia, are crucial for optimizing treatment. Further large-scale randomized trials and research are warranted to identify predictive biomarkers and optimize pemigatinib-based treatment strategies for CCA patients with FGFR2 alterations.
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.