MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410599479 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32060293

Therapeutic Advances in Initially Unresectable Locally Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Emerging Treatments and the Role of Liver Transplantation

2025· review· en· W4410599479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sofia Lopiano, James V. Guarrera, Keri E. Lunsford

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineIntrahepatic CholangiocarcinomaLiver transplantationTransplantationCancer researchGeneral surgeryPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimal curative therapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) involves hepatic resection; however, due to its insidious nature, iCCA frequently presents at advanced stages. Consequently, 70-80% of patients feature unresectable iCCA at presentation. Recent expansions in therapeutic options for locally advanced unresectable iCCA include immunotherapy, targeted chemotherapeutics, and liver-directed therapies. These have increased progression-free survival, enhanced response rates, and improved downstaging for resection. Liver transplant has also emerged as an alternative for patients whose tumors remain unresectable despite therapeutic response. Here, we explore emerging treatment options included in a multidisciplinary treatment paradigm to prolong survival in patients with initially unresectable locally advanced iCCA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207