Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Endocrinol.
Sec. Cancer Endocrinology
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1284283
This article is part of the Research Topic Biomolecular Modifications in Endocrine-Related Cancers, Volume II View all 3 articles

Prognostic Models for Mucinous and Non-specific Adeno Cholangiocarcinoma: A Population-based Retrospective Study

Provisionally accepted
  • Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Background: Clinically, the diagnosis and treatment of cholangiocarcinoma are generally different according to the location of occurrence, and the studies rarely consider the differences between different pathological types. Cholangiocarcinomas in large-and middle-sized intrahepatic bile ducts are mostly mucinous, while in small sized bile duct are not; mucinous extrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas are also more common than mucinous intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. However, it is unclear whether these pathological type differences are related to the prognosis. Methods: Data of total 22509 patients was analyzed from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database out of which 22299 patients were diagnosed with common adeno cholangiocarcinoma while 210 were diagnosed with mucinous cholangiocarcinoma. Based on the propensity score matching (PSM) analysis, between these two groups' clinical, demographic, and therapeutic features were contrasted. The data were analyzed using Cox and LASSO regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Ultimately, overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) related prognostic models were established and validated in test and external datasets and nomograms were created to forecast these patients' prognosis. Results: There was no difference in prognosis between mucinous cholangiocarcinoma and adeno cholangiocarcinoma. Therefore, we constructed prognostic model and nomogram that can be used for mucinous and adeno cholangiocarcinoma at the same time. By comparing the 9 independent key characteristics i.e Age, tumor size, the number of primary tumors, AJCC stage, Grade, lymph node status, metastasis, surgery and chemotherapy, risk scores were calculated for each individual. By integrating these two pathological types in OS and CSS prognostic models, effective prognosis prediction results could be achieved in multiple datasets (OS: AUC 0.70-0.87; CSS: AUC 0.74-0.89). Conclusion: Age, tumor size, the number of primary tumors, AJCC stage, Grade, lymph node status, metastasis, surgery and chemotherapy are the independent prognostic factors in OS or CSS of the patients with mucinous and ordinary cholangiocarcinoma. Nomogram that can be used for mucinous and adeno cholangiocarcinoma at the same time is of significance in clinical practice and management of cholangiocarcinoma.

    Keywords: Cholangiocarcinoma, pathologic subtype, risk score, prognosis, Mucinous cholangiocarcinoma

    Received: 28 Aug 2023; Accepted: 11 May 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Zhang, Azhar, Liu, Huang, Yongxiang, Zhou, Xiong, Wen and Zou. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Zi-jian Zhang, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
    Yun-Peng Huang, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
    Li Xiong, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
    Yu Wen, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
    Heng Zou, Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.