Literature DB >> 28338651

Dichotomy in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas based on histologic similarities to hilar cholangiocarcinomas.

Masayuki Akita1,2, Kohei Fujikura1, Tetsuo Ajiki2, Takumi Fukumoto2, Kyoko Otani1, Takeshi Azuma3, Tomoo Itoh1, Yonson Ku2, Yoh Zen1.   

Abstract

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas were classified into two types based on their microscopic appearance. Tumors with histologic similarities to hilar cholangiocarcinomas (predominantly ductal adenocarcinomas with minor tubular components, if present, restricted to the invasive front) were defined as the perihilar type, whereas the others were classified as peripheral cholangiocarcinomas. Among the 47 cases examined in the present study, 26 (55%) were classified as the perihilar type, whereas 21 (45%) were the peripheral type. The perihilar type had higher pT stages and more frequently showed a periductal-infiltrating gross appearance and microscopic perineural infiltration than peripheral cholangiocarcinomas. The presence of low-grade biliary intraepithelial neoplasia in the adjacent bile ducts was only found in perihilar cholangiocarcinomas (6/21, 29%). The immunophenotype also differed between the two types with MUC5AC and MUC6 being more commonly expressed in the perihilar type. One-third of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas lacked the expression of SMAD4, suggesting SMAD4 mutations, whereas the loss of BAP1 expression and IDH1 mutations were almost restricted to the peripheral type (35 and 15%, respectively). Patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma had worse overall survival than those with peripheral cancer (P=0.027). A multivariate analysis identified the histologic classification as an independent prognostic factor (P=0.005, HR=3.638). Comparisons between intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinomas also revealed that the molecular features and prognosis of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas were very similar to those of hilar cholangiocarcinomas. In conclusion, this histology-based classification scheme of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas will be useful and clinically relevant because it represents different underlying molecular features and has an independent prognostic value.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28338651     DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2017.22

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  28 in total

1.  Genomic spectra of biliary tract cancer.

Authors:  Hiromi Nakamura; Yasuhito Arai; Yasushi Totoki; Tomoki Shirota; Asmaa Elzawahry; Mamoru Kato; Natsuko Hama; Fumie Hosoda; Tomoko Urushidate; Shoko Ohashi; Nobuyoshi Hiraoka; Hidenori Ojima; Kazuaki Shimada; Takuji Okusaka; Tomoo Kosuge; Shinichi Miyagawa; Tatsuhiro Shibata
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  Proposal of progression model for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: clinicopathologic differences between hilar type and peripheral type.

Authors:  Shinichi Aishima; Yousuke Kuroda; Yunosuke Nishihara; Tomohiro Iguchi; Kenichi Taguchi; Akinobu Taketomi; Yoshihiko Maehara; Masazumi Tsuneyoshi
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  K-ras mutation is strongly associated with perineural invasion and represents an independent prognostic factor of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after hepatectomy.

Authors:  Tse-Ching Chen; Yi-Yin Jan; Ta-Sen Yeh
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Mass-forming intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with marked enhancement on arterial-phase computed tomography reflects favorable surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Shun-Ichi Ariizumi; Yoshihito Kotera; Yutaka Takahashi; Satoshi Katagiri; I-Pei Chen; Takehiro Ota; Masakazu Yamamoto
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-03-29       Impact factor: 3.454

5.  Correlation of CT patterns of primary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma at the time of presentation with the metastatic spread and clinical outcomes: retrospective study of 92 patients.

Authors:  Akshay D Baheti; Sree Harsha Tirumani; Atul B Shinagare; Michael H Rosenthal; Jason L Hornick; Nikhil H Ramaiya; Brian M Wolpin
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2014-12

6.  Clinicopathological prognostic factors after hepatectomy for patients with mass-forming type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: relevance of the lymphatic invasion index.

Authors:  Ken Shirabe; Yohei Mano; Akinobu Taketomi; Yuji Soejima; Hideaki Uchiyama; Shinichi Aishima; Hiroto Kayashima; Mizuki Ninomiya; Yoshihiko Maehara
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-02-05       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Comparison of clinical characteristics of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma and other primary liver cancers.

Authors:  Chern-Horng Lee; Sen-Yung Hsieh; Chee-Jen Chang; Yu-Jr Lin
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.029

8.  S100P immunostaining identifies a subset of peripheral-type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas with morphological and molecular features similar to those of perihilar and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.

Authors:  Jia-Huei Tsai; Wen-Chih Huang; Kuan-Ting Kuo; Ray-Hwang Yuan; Yu-Ling Chen; Yung-Ming Jeng
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 5.087

9.  An inhibitor of mutant IDH1 delays growth and promotes differentiation of glioma cells.

Authors:  Dan Rohle; Janeta Popovici-Muller; Nicolaos Palaskas; Sevin Turcan; Christian Grommes; Carl Campos; Jennifer Tsoi; Owen Clark; Barbara Oldrini; Evangelia Komisopoulou; Kaiko Kunii; Alicia Pedraza; Stefanie Schalm; Lee Silverman; Alexandra Miller; Fang Wang; Hua Yang; Yue Chen; Andrew Kernytsky; Marc K Rosenblum; Wei Liu; Scott A Biller; Shinsan M Su; Cameron W Brennan; Timothy A Chan; Thomas G Graeber; Katharine E Yen; Ingo K Mellinghoff
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations in cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Benjamin R Kipp; Jesse S Voss; Sarah E Kerr; Emily G Barr Fritcher; Rondell P Graham; Lizhi Zhang; W Edward Highsmith; Jun Zhang; Lewis R Roberts; Gregory J Gores; Kevin C Halling
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 3.526

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  Cholangiocarcinoma 2020: the next horizon in mechanisms and management.

Authors:  Jesus M Banales; Jose J G Marin; Angela Lamarca; Pedro M Rodrigues; Shahid A Khan; Lewis R Roberts; Vincenzo Cardinale; Guido Carpino; Jesper B Andersen; Chiara Braconi; Diego F Calvisi; Maria J Perugorria; Luca Fabris; Luke Boulter; Rocio I R Macias; Eugenio Gaudio; Domenico Alvaro; Sergio A Gradilone; Mario Strazzabosco; Marco Marzioni; Cédric Coulouarn; Laura Fouassier; Chiara Raggi; Pietro Invernizzi; Joachim C Mertens; Anja Moncsek; Sumera Rizvi; Julie Heimbach; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Jordi Bruix; Alejandro Forner; John Bridgewater; Juan W Valle; Gregory J Gores
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  A proposal of imaging classification of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma into ductal and parenchymal types: clinicopathologic significance.

Authors:  Hyungjin Rhee; Myeong-Jin Kim; Young Nyun Park; Chansik An
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Comprehensive analysis of genomic alterations of Chinese hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Authors:  Feiling Feng; Xiaobing Wu; Xiaoliang Shi; Qingxiang Gao; Yue Wu; Yong Yu; Qingbao Cheng; Bin Li; Bin Yi; Chen Liu; Qing Hao; Lin Zhang; Chunfang Gao; Xiaoqing Jiang
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 4.  Imaging mimickers of cholangiocarcinoma: a pictorial review.

Authors:  Si Min Chiow; Hau Wei Khoo; Jee Keem Low; Cher Heng Tan; Hsien Min Low
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-01-03

5.  Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinomas Have Histologically and Immunophenotypically Distinct Small and Large Duct Patterns.

Authors:  Carlie S Sigel; Esther Drill; Yi Zhou; Olca Basturk; Gokce Askan; Linda M Pak; Efsevia Vakiani; Tao Wang; Thomas Boerner; Richard K G Do; Amber L Simpson; William Jarnagin; David S Klimstra
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 6.394

6.  EVI1 expression is associated with aggressive behavior in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Mariko Tanaka; Junji Shibahara; Shumpei Ishikawa; Tetsuo Ushiku; Teppei Morikawa; Aya Shinozaki-Ushiku; Akimasa Hayashi; Kento Misumi; Atsushi Tanaka; Hiroto Katoh; Kei Sakuma; Takashi Kokudo; Yoshinori Inagaki; Junichi Arita; Yoshihiro Sakamoto; Kiyoshi Hasegawa; Masashi Fukayama
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  Frequency and prognostic significance of isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 mutations in cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Audra N Boscoe; Catherine Rolland; Robin Kate Kelley
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2019-08

Review 8.  Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Morpho-molecular pathology, tumor reactive microenvironment, and malignant progression.

Authors:  Alphonse E Sirica; Mario Strazzabosco; Massimiliano Cadamuro
Journal:  Adv Cancer Res       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 6.242

9.  A new pathological classification of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma according to protein expression of SSTR2 and Bcl2.

Authors:  Shoko Yamashita; Yuji Morine; Satoru Imura; Tetsuya Ikemoto; Yu Saito; Chie Takasu; Shinichiro Yamada; Kazunori Tokuda; Shohei Okikawa; Katsuki Miyazaki; Takeshi Oya; Koichi Tsuneyama; Mitsuo Shimada
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 2.754

Review 10.  Virus-Driven Carcinogenesis.

Authors:  Yuichiro Hatano; Takayasu Ideta; Akihiro Hirata; Kayoko Hatano; Hiroyuki Tomita; Hideshi Okada; Masahito Shimizu; Takuji Tanaka; Akira Hara
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.