Meta‐analysis of prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with resected hilar cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1408-1416.
Published: 12th July 2018
Authors: N. T. E. Bird, A. McKenna, J. Dodd, G. Poston, R. Jones, H. Malik et al.
Hilar cholangiocarcinoma is staged using the AJCC staging system. Numerous other prognostically important histopathological and demographic characteristics have been reported. The objective of this meta‐analysis was to assess statistically the effect of postresectional tumour characteristics on overall survival of patients undergoing attempted radical curative resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Relevant studies were identified by searching the Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed databases. The search was limited to studies published between 2009 and 2017. Papers referring to intrahepatic or distal cholangiocarcinoma were excluded from review. Data extraction used standard Parmar modifications to determine pooled univariable hazard ratios (HRs).
Twenty‐four articles, containing 4599 patients, were assessed quantitatively. In pooled analyses, age (HR 1·16, 95 per cent c.i. 1·04 to 1·28), T category (HR 1·49, 1·30 to 1·70), lymph node involvement (HR 1·78, 1·65 to 1·93), microvascular invasion (HR 1·49, 1·34 to 1·68), perineural invasion (HR 1·54, 1·40 to 1·68) and tumour differentiation (HR 1·54, 1·38 to 1·72) were significant prognostic factors, with low heterogeneity. Portal vein resection (HR 1·54, 1·15 to 1·70) and resection margin status (HR 1·77, 1·57 to 1·99) had significant effects, but with high heterogeneity. Sex, tumour size and preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19‐9 levels did not have a statistically significant effect on postoperative prognosis.
Several tumour biological variables not included in the seventh edition of the AJCC classification affect overall survival. These require incorporation into prognostic models to ensure a personalized approach to prognostication and treatment.Full text
You may also be interested in
Authors: M. Del Chiaro, K. Søreide
Multicentre study of the prognostic impact of preoperative bodyweight on long‐term prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma.
Authors: J. J. Yu, F. Shen, T. H. Chen, L. Liang, J. Han, H. Xing et al.
Notes: BMI matters
Authors: M. van Putten, S. D. Nelen, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, J. H. M. B. Stoot, H. H. Hartgrink, S. S. Gisbertz et al.
Notes: Practise makes perfect?
Oesophagectomy with or without supraclavicular lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus.
Authors: S. Mine, M. Watanabe, K. Kumagai, A. Okamura, K. Yamashita, M. Hayami et al.
Notes: Extended dissection not needed
Authors: G. Marchegiani, S. Andrianello, G. Morbin, E. Secchettin, M. D'Onofrio, R. De Robertis et al.
Notes: Duct dilatation no risk alone
Authors: J. Zheng, S.‐H. Xie, G. Santoni, J. Lagergren
Notes: Diabetes increases risk
Lymph node regression and survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.
Authors: A. R. Davies, D. Myoteri, J. Zylstra, C. R. Baker, W. Wulaningsih, M. Van Hemelrijck et al.
Notes: Nodal response predicts survival
Pancreas‐sparing, ampulla‐preserving duodenectomy for major duodenal (D1–D2) perforations. BJS 2018; 105: 1487-1492.
Authors: S. Di Saverio, E. Segalini, A. Birindelli, S. Todero, M. Podda, A. Rizzuto et al.
Notes: Useful option
Profile of exhaled‐breath volatile organic compounds to diagnose pancreatic cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 1493-1500.
Authors: S. R. Markar, B. Brodie, S.‐T. Chin, A. Romano, D. Spalding, G. B. Hanna et al.
Notes: Breath test for pancreatic cancer
Authors: S. Gasteiger, B. Cardini, G. Göbel, R. Oberhuber, F. Messner, T. Resch et al.
Notes: Good outcome in selected patients
Network meta‐analysis of surgical management of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease in adults. BJS 2018; 105: 1398-1407.
Authors: M. A. Amer, M. D. Smith, C. H. Khoo, G. P. Herbison, J. L. McCall