ArticleRadiation oncology journal2025
Definitive radiotherapy for unresectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: is it time for an update?
Article in Radiation oncology journal, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFor patients with unresectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, radiotherapy (RT) is the definitive treatment. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the role of two different RT techniques for definitive treatment of unresectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND
methodsEighteen patients with unresectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with either conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) were evaluated retrospectively. Patients treated with CFRT also received elective nodal irradiation (ENI) in addition to the primary tumor.
resultsMedian doses of CFRT and SBRT were 50.4 Gy (range, 45 to 59.4) in 25-33 fractions and 37.5 Gy (range, 27.5 to 50) in 3-5 fractions, respectively. Median follow-up was 22 months (range, 7 to 138). During follow-up, local failure occured in one patient (12.5%) in the SBRT group and six patients (60.0%) in the CFRT group (p = 0.041). On the other hand, regional failure occured in five patients (62.5%) in the SBRT group and in two patients (20.0%) in the CFRT group (p = 0.047). Two-year overall survival (OS), local-regional failure-free survival (LRFFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were 35%, 30%, and 24%, respectively. Younger age (≤55 years) was associated with better OS, LRFFS, and DMFS. None of the patients experienced ≥grade 3 acute or late toxicity.
conclusionWhile SBRT may provide better local tumor control compared to CFRT, the absence of ENI can result in increased regional recurrences. Hence, conducting prospective studies to examine the safety and efficacy of integrating hypofractionated ENI into SBRT is warranted.
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.