ArticleIranian journal of pathology2025
Diagnostic Value of Biomarkers in the Diagnosis of Cholangiocarcinoma and Its Benign Mimickers.
Article in Iranian journal of pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & Objective: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a malignancy that accounts for approximately 3% gastrointestinal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic value of CD56, SMAD4, CEA, and p53 biomarkers in diagnosing cholangiocarcinoma and its benign mimickers. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 54 CCA specimens and 27 non-cancerous pancreatobiliary tissue samples diagnosed between 2018 and 2022. All specimens were evaluated using immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining for CD56, SMAD4, CEA, and p53 expression. The cut-off value of each marker was obtained from the respective kit instructions and previous studies. The results were analyzed using SPSS version 26. A significance level of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of the 81 specimens, the mean age in the case and control groups was 57.33 ± 11.99 and 44.7 ± 16.69 years, respectively, and 51 (63%) samples were obtained from male patients. We found that 39.5% had grade III p53 expression, 13.5% had grade II p53 expression, 41.9% had grade III CEA expression, and 9.8% had grade II CEA expression. Additionally, 17.3% were positive for CD56 expression, and 7.4% showed SMAD4 loss. There were significant associations between the expression of CEA (79.6%) and p53 (74%) in the CCA group (p-value < 0.05). However, SMAD4 loss and CD56 expression were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Expression of CEA and p53 based on IHC staining is associated with the occurrence of CCA. However, SMAD4 and CD56 were not significantly associated with CCA. Further survival analysis and sensitivity and specificity assessments are needed to obtain more comprehensive results.
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.