The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cholangiocarcinoma—controversies and challenges
Open accessAbstract
Cholangiocarcinomas are a diverse group of tumors that are presumed to originate from the biliary tract epithelium either within the liver or the biliary tract. These cancers are often difficult to diagnose, their pathogenesis is poorly understood, and their dismal prognosis has resulted in a nihilistic approach to their management. The two major clinical phenotypes are intrahepatic, mass-forming tumors and large ductal tumors. Among the ductal cancers, lesions at the liver hilum are most prevalent. The risk factors, clinical presentation, natural history and management of these two types of cholangiocarcinoma are distinct. Efforts to improve outcomes for patients with these diseases are affected by several challenges to effective management. For example, designations based on anatomical characteristics have been inconsistently applied, which has confounded analysis of epidemiological trends and assessment of risk factors. The evaluation of therapeutic options, particularly systemic therapies, has been limited by a lack of appreciation of the different phenotypes. Controversies exist regarding the appropriate workup and choice of management approach. However, new and emerging tools for improved diagnosis, expanded indications for surgical approaches, an emerging role for locoregional and intrabiliary therapies and improved systemic therapies provide optimism and hope for improved outcomes in the future.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meng, F., Henson, R., Lang, M., Wehbe, H., Maheshwari, S., Mendell, J. T., Jiang, J., Schmittgen, T. D., & Patel, T. (2006) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2006.02.057 · Cited by 984
Self-citationLevy, C., Lymp, J., Angulo, P., Gores, G. J., Larusso, N., & Lindor, K. D. (2005) · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · doi:10.1007/s10620-005-2927-8 · Cited by 339
Liver transplantation for cholangiocarcinoma
Rosen, C. B., Heimbach, J. K., & Gores, G. J. (2010) · Transplant International · doi:10.1111/j.1432-2277.2010.01108.x · Cited by 271
Cited by
Banales, J. M., Cardinale, V., Carpino, G., Marzioni, M., Andersen, J. B., Invernizzi, P., Lind, G. E., Folseraas, T., Forbes, S. J., Fouassier, L., et al. (2016) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2016.51 · Cited by 1,376
Palmer, W. C., & Patel, T. (2012) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2012.02.022 · Cited by 517
Self-citationLunsford, K. E., Javle, M., Heyne, K., Shroff, R. T., Abdel-Wahab, R., Gupta, N., Mobley, C. M., Saharia, A., Victor, D. W., Nguyen, D. T., et al. (2018) · The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1016/s2468-1253(18)30045-1 · Cited by 298
Prognostic impact of tumour-infiltrating immune cells on biliary tract cancer
Goeppert, B., Frauenschuh, L., Zucknick, M., Stenzinger, A., Andrulis, M., Klauschen, F., Joehrens, K., Warth, A., Renner, M., Mehrabi, A., et al. (2013) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.610 · Cited by 275
Metadata
- Authors
- Patel, T.
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 189-200
- ISSN
- 1759-5045 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-5053
- OpenAlex
- W2058269557
- Cited by
- 337
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 4.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cholangiocarcinoma—controversies and challenges. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrgastro.2011.20
- The paper
- Patel, T. (2011). Cholangiocarcinoma—controversies and challenges. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2011.20
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.