Narong Khuntikeo1, Supinda Koonmee2, Prakasit Sa-Ngiamwibool2, Nittaya Chamadol3, Vallop Laopaiboon3, Attapol Titapun1, Puangrat Yongvanit4, Watcharin Loilome4, Nisana Namwat4, Ross H Andrews5, Trevor N Petney6, Kavin Thinkhamrop7, Nathaphop Chaichaya7, Chaiwat Tawarungruang7, Jaruwan Thuanman7, Bandit Thinkhamrop8. 1. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. 2. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. 3. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. 4. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. 5. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Faculty of Medicine, St Mary's Campus, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom. 6. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; State Museum of Natural History Karlsruhe, Erbprinzenstrasse 13, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany. 7. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Data Management and Statistical Analysis Center (DAMASAC), Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. 8. Cholangiocarcinoma Screening and Care Program (CASCAP), Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand; Data Management and Statistical Analysis Center (DAMASAC), Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. Electronic address: bandit@kku.ac.th.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) usually have no specific symptoms until an advance stage of the disease and curative treatment is not possible. Patients with early stage, operable disease can be found using ultrasonography (US). A US-screening program was implemented in Thailand where CCA incidence is the highest worldwide. Here we evaluate the effectiveness of the program by comparing the proportion of individuals with early stage CCA in the screening group with that of the walk-in group presenting at hospitals with clinical symptoms. METHODS: All patients had a pathological diagnosis of CCA. The difference in the proportions and the 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained using binomial regression. RESULTS: Of the 762 histologically proven CCA cases, 161 were from the screening group and 601 from the walk-in group. The proportion of early stage CCA (stages 0 to II) diagnosed was 84.5% in the screening and 21.6% in the walk-in groups. After adjustment age, gender, and liver fluke infection, there was a significantly higher proportion (P < 0.001) and higher chance (P < 0.001) of having early stage CCA in the screening group than in the walk-in group. CONCLUSIONS: US-screening is an effective tool for detecting early stage, operable CCA in high incidence areas. Crown
BACKGROUND:Patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) usually have no specific symptoms until an advance stage of the disease and curative treatment is not possible. Patients with early stage, operable disease can be found using ultrasonography (US). A US-screening program was implemented in Thailand where CCA incidence is the highest worldwide. Here we evaluate the effectiveness of the program by comparing the proportion of individuals with early stage CCA in the screening group with that of the walk-in group presenting at hospitals with clinical symptoms. METHODS: All patients had a pathological diagnosis of CCA. The difference in the proportions and the 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained using binomial regression. RESULTS: Of the 762 histologically proven CCA cases, 161 were from the screening group and 601 from the walk-in group. The proportion of early stage CCA (stages 0 to II) diagnosed was 84.5% in the screening and 21.6% in the walk-in groups. After adjustment age, gender, and liver fluke infection, there was a significantly higher proportion (P < 0.001) and higher chance (P < 0.001) of having early stage CCA in the screening group than in the walk-in group. CONCLUSIONS: US-screening is an effective tool for detecting early stage, operable CCA in high incidence areas. Crown