Long‐term survivors after curative‐intent resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the current study was to characterize prognostic factors related to long-term recurrence-free survival after curative-intent resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). METHODS: Data on patients who underwent curative-intent resection for ICC between 2000 and 2020 were collected from an international multi-institutional database. Prognostic factors were investigated among patients who recurred within 5 years versus long-term survivors who survived more than 5 years with no recurrence. RESULTS: Among 635 patients who underwent curative-intent resection for ICC, 104 (16.4%) patients were long-term survivors with no recurrence beyond 5 years after surgery. Patients who survived for more than 5 years with no recurrence were more likely to have less aggressive tumor features, as well as have undergone an R0 resection versus patients who recurred within 5 years after resection. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (>5 cm) (HR: 1.535, 95% CI: 1.254-1.879), satellite lesions (HR: 1.253, 95% CI: 1.003-1.564), and lymph node metastasis (HR: 1.733, 95% CI: 1.349-2.227) were independently associated with recurrence within 5 years. Patients who recurred beyond 5 years (n = 23), 2-5 years (n = 60), and within 2 years (n = 471) had an incrementally worse post-recurrence survival (PRS, 28.0 vs. 20.0 vs. 12.0 months, p = 0.032). Among patients with N0 status, tumor size (>5 cm) (HR: 1.612, 95% CI: 1.087-2.390) and perineural invasion (PNI) (HR: 1.562,95% CI: 1.081-2.255) were risk factors associated with recurrence. Among patients with N1 disease, only a minority (5/128, 3.9%) of patients survived with no recurrence to 5 years. CONCLUSION: Roughly 1 in 6 patients survived for more than 5 years with no recurrence following curative-intent resection of ICC. Among N0 patients, tumor recurrence was associated with tumor size and PNI. Only a small subset of N1 patients experienced long-term survival.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".