Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Aug 23;15(17):4217.
doi: 10.3390/cancers15174217.

Locoregional Treatment in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Which Treatment for Which Patient?

Héloïse Bourien  1 , Chiara Carlotta Pircher  2 , Boris Guiu  3 , Angela Lamarca  4   5   6 , Juan W Valle  5   6 , Monica Niger  2 , Julien Edeline  1
Affiliations
Review

Locoregional Treatment in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Which Treatment for Which Patient?

Héloïse Bourien et al. Cancers (Basel). .

Abstract

For unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC), different locoregional treatments (LRT) could be proposed to patients, including radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA), external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or transarterial treatments, depending on patient and tumor characteristics and local expertise. These different techniques of LRT have not been compared in a randomized clinical trial; most of the relevant studies are retrospective and not comparative. The aim of this narrative review is to help clinicians in their everyday practice discuss the pros and cons of each LRT, depending on the individual characteristics of their patients.

Keywords: cholangiocarcinoma; locoregional treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Héloïse Bourien: Travel and educational support from Amgen. Julien Edeline: Consulting: MSD, Eisai, BMS, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Roche, Ipsen, Basilea, Merck Serono, Incyte, Servier, Beigene, Taiho, Boston ScientificTravel expense: Amgen. Research funding (institutional): BMS, Beigene, Boston Scientific. Angela Lamarca: Travel and educational support from Ipsen, Pfizer, Bayer, AAA, SirtEx, Novartis, Mylan, Delcath Advanza Pharma and Roche. Speaker honoraria from Merck, Pfizer, Ipsen, Incyte, AAA, QED, Servier, Astra Zeneca, EISAI, Roche and Advanz Pharma. Advisory and consultancy honoraria from EISAI, Nutricia Ipsen, QED, Roche, Servier, Boston Scientific, Albireo Pharma, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GENFIT, TransThera Biosciences and Taiho. Principal Investigator associated Institutional Funding form QED, Merck, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Astra Zeneca, GenFit, Albireo Pharma. Member of the Knowledge Network and NETConnect Initiatives funded by Ipsen. Dr. Valle reports personal fees from Agios, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Baxter, personal fees from Genoscience Pharma, personal fees from Hutchison Medipharma, personal fees from Imaging Equipment Ltd. (AAA), personal fees from Incyte, personal fees from Ipsen, personal fees from Mundipharma EDO, personal fees from Mylan, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from NuCana, personal fees from QED, personal fees from Servier, personal fees from Sirtex, personal fees from Zymeworks, outside the submitted work. Niger Monica: Travel expenses from Celgene and AstraZeneca, speaker honorarium from Accademia della Medicina and Incyte; honoraria from Sandoz, Medpoint SRL and Servier for editorial collaboration. Consultant honoraria from EMD Serono, Basilea Pharmaceutica, Incyte, MSD Italia, Servier, Astrazeneca and Taiho. Pircher Chiara Carlotta has no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) The pros and cons of RFA and MWA; (B) the pros and cons of EBRT; (C) the pros and cons of SIRT; (D) the pros and cons of TACE; (E) the pros and cons of HAIC.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A) Potential ideal candidate for an ablation; (B) potential ideal candidate for external beam radiotherapy; (C) potential ideal candidate for SIRT; (D) potential ideal candidate for HIAC.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proposed continuum of care for selection of potential locoregional treatment for liver-only intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Valle J., Wasan H., Palmer D.H., Cunningham D., Anthoney A., Maraveyas A., Madhusudan S., Iveson T., Hughes S., Pereira S.P., et al. Cisplatin plus Gemcitabine versus Gemcitabine for Biliary Tract Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010;362:1273–1281. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0908721. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Okusaka T., Nakachi K., Fukutomi A., Mizuno N., Ohkawa S., Funakoshi A., Nagino M., Kondo S., Nagaoka S., Funai J., et al. Gemcitabine alone or in combination with cisplatin in patients with biliary tract cancer: A comparative multicentre study in Japan. Br. J. Cancer. 2010;103:469–474. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605779. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Oh D.-Y., Ruth H.A., Qin S., Chen L.-T., Okusaka T., Vogel A., Kim J.W., Suksombooncharoen T., Ah L.M., Kitano M., et al. Durvalumab plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer. NEJM Evid. 2022;1:EVIDoa2200015. doi: 10.1056/EVIDoa2200015. - DOI
    1. Groot Koerkamp B., Fong Y. Outcomes in biliary malignancy. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014;110:585–591. doi: 10.1002/jso.23762. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cillo U., Fondevila C., Donadon M., Gringeri E., Mocchegiani F., Schlitt H.J., Ijzermans J.N.M., Vivarelli M., Zieniewicz K., Olde Damink S.W.M., et al. Surgery for cholangiocarcinoma. Liver Int. 2019;39((Suppl. S1)):143–155. doi: 10.1111/liv.14089. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Grants and funding

This research received no external funding.

LinkOut - more resources