The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adjuvant Therapy in the Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Purpose: The benefit of adjuvant therapy (AT) for biliary tract cancer (BTC) is unclear, with conflicting results from nonrandomized studies. We report a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the impact of AT on survival. Methods: Studies published between 1960 and November 2010, which evaluated adjuvant chemotherapy (CT), radiotherapy (RT), or both (CRT) compared with curative-intent surgery alone for resected BTC were included. Only tumors of the gallbladder and bile ducts were assessed. Published data were extracted and computed into odds ratios (ORs) for death at 5 years. Subgroup analyses of benefit based on lymph node (LN) or resection margin positivity (R1) were prespecified. Data were weighted by generic inverse variance and pooled using random-effect modeling. Results: Twenty studies involving 6,712 patients were analyzed. There was a nonsignificant improvement in overall survival with any AT compared with surgery alone (pooled OR, 0.74; P = .06). There was no difference between gallbladder and bile duct tumors (P = .68). The association was significant when the two registry analyses were excluded. Those receiving CT or CRT derived statistically greater benefit than RT alone (OR, 0.39, 0.61, and 0.98, respectively; P = .02). The greatest benefit for AT was in those with LN-positive disease (OR, 0.49; P = .004) and R1 disease (OR, 0.36; P = .002). Conclusion: This analysis supports AT for BTC. Prospective randomized trials are needed to provide better rationale for this commonly used strategy. On the basis of our data, such trials could involve two active comparators rather than a no-treatment arm among patients with LN-positive or R1 disease.
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
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Jemal, A., Siegel, R., Xu, J., & Ward, E. (2010) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.20073 · Cited by 12,596
Cited by
Cholangiocarcinoma — evolving concepts and therapeutic strategies
Ilyas, S. I., Khan, S. A., Hallemeier, C. L., Kelley, R. K., & Gores, G. J. (2018) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.157 · Cited by 1,626
Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Biliary Tract Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline
Shroff, R. T., Kennedy, E. B., Bachini, M., Bekaii-Saab, T., Crane, C., Edeline, J., El-Khoueiry, A., Feng, M., Katz, M. H. G., Primrose, J., et al. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.18.02178 · Cited by 445
Ben-Josef, E., Guthrie, K. A., El-Khoueiry, A. B., Corless, C. L., Zalupski, M. M., Lowy, A. M., Thomas, C. R., Alberts, S. R., Dawson, L. A., Micetich, K. C., et al. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.60.2219 · Cited by 420
Cholangiocarcinoma: Recent Advances in Molecular Pathobiology and Therapeutic Approaches
Khosla, D., Misra, S., Chu, P. L., Guan, P., Nada, R., Gupta, R., Kaewnarin, K., Ko, T. K., Heng, H. L., Srinivasalu, V. K., et al. (2024) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers16040801 · Cited by 44
Metadata
- Authors
- Horgan, A. M., Amir, E., Walter, T., & Knox, J. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2012-06-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 1934-1940
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2148899606
- Cited by
- 716
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Adjuvant Therapy in the Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2011.40.5381
- The paper
- Horgan, A. M., Amir, E., Walter, T., & Knox, J. J. (2012). Adjuvant Therapy in the Treatment of Biliary Tract Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.40.5381
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.