ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Neoadjuvant Therapy as a Selection Strategy for Curative Resection in High-Risk Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-risk features (e.g., vascular invasion, lymph node involvement, multifocality, elevated carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA19-9], tumor size >5 cm) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) are associated with poor prognosis, leading to increased use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT).
methodsPatients (n = 425) treated in 2000-2024 at Mayo Clinic Rochester were categorized into four groups: (1) high-risk iCCA with NAT (chemotherapy- or chemoimmunotherapy-based regimens) followed by surgery, (2) high-risk iCCA with upfront resection, (3) low-risk iCCA with upfront resection, and (4) high-risk iCCA receiving NAT without surgery ("dropouts"). Outcomes included overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). An external cohort of 203 iCCA patients from MD Anderson Cancer Center also was analyzed using identical criteria.
resultsOf 425 patients, 342 (80.5%) were at high risk and 83 (19.5%) were at low risk (all upfront resection). Among the high-risk patients, 172 (50.3%) received NAT and 96 (55.8%) underwent upfront resection, whereas 76 (44.2%) dropped out. The NAT regimens included doublet gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC, n = 56) and triplet chemo(immuno)therapy with gemcitabine-cisplatin-nab-paclitaxel (GAP, n = 30) or gemcitabine-cisplatin-durvalumab (GCD, n = 10). The NAT patients who proceeded to resection showed significantly longer OS than those who had upfront resection (68.6 vs. 34.9 months; p = 0.007), with no significant difference from low-risk patients (106.2 months, p = 0.132). Intensified regimens (GAP/GCD) yielded superior OS, whereas RFS did not significantly differ across groups. Comparable survival trends were observed in the external cohort.
conclusionNeoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent resection was associated with improved OS, reflecting selection of systemic therapy-responsive high-risk patients with more favorable tumor biology, achieving outcomes similar to those of low-risk groups. Conversely, 45% failed to proceed to surgery due to progression or clinical deterioration, experiencing OS comparable with palliative care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42082871What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.