Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences · 2026
Gross Intrahepatic Mass Formation Predicts the Primary Site of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma Based on Molecular Pathologic Studies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Masuda Yuki, Kubota Naoto, Takemura Ryo, Arai Yasuhito, Abe Yuta, Itano Osamu, Esaki Minoru, Shibata Tatsuhiro, Kitagawa Yuko, Ojima Hidenori
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA) are clinically and genetically distinct. However, the classification of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (phCCA) with an intrahepatic tumor mass remains unclear. This study aimed to position phCCA near the hilar plate (hCCA) within an extrahepatic-intrahepatic framework using pathological and molecular analyses.
METHODS: Among 357 resected invasive CCAs, 100 hCCAs were histologically classified as either hCCA with (hCCA-M) or hCCA without (hCCA-NM) a grossly evident intrahepatic mass. Transcriptomic comparison of 9 typical eCCAs and 39 mass-forming iCCAs identified three contextual markers, which were examined by immunohistochemistry in 309 additional cases.
RESULTS: Among 100 hCCAs, 85 were hCCA-NM and 15 hCCA-M. Claudin 18 (CLDN18) and mesothelin (MSLN) were identified as extrahepatic contextual markers, and serpin family A member 1 (SERPINA1) as an intrahepatic contextual marker. SERPINA1 was more highly expressed in hCCA-M than in hCCA-NM, regardless of microscopic liver parenchymal invasion, whereas CLDN18 and MSLN were similarly expressed in both. Cluster analysis revealed that hCCA-NM clustered with eCCA, whereas hCCA-M clustered with iCCA.
CONCLUSIONS: Gross intrahepatic mass formation indicates an intrahepatic contextual profile and provides a useful criterion for subclassifying hCCA. This contextual framework shows that hCCA-M and hCCA-NM represent biologically distinct tumor groups.
METHODS: Among 357 resected invasive CCAs, 100 hCCAs were histologically classified as either hCCA with (hCCA-M) or hCCA without (hCCA-NM) a grossly evident intrahepatic mass. Transcriptomic comparison of 9 typical eCCAs and 39 mass-forming iCCAs identified three contextual markers, which were examined by immunohistochemistry in 309 additional cases.
RESULTS: Among 100 hCCAs, 85 were hCCA-NM and 15 hCCA-M. Claudin 18 (CLDN18) and mesothelin (MSLN) were identified as extrahepatic contextual markers, and serpin family A member 1 (SERPINA1) as an intrahepatic contextual marker. SERPINA1 was more highly expressed in hCCA-M than in hCCA-NM, regardless of microscopic liver parenchymal invasion, whereas CLDN18 and MSLN were similarly expressed in both. Cluster analysis revealed that hCCA-NM clustered with eCCA, whereas hCCA-M clustered with iCCA.
CONCLUSIONS: Gross intrahepatic mass formation indicates an intrahepatic contextual profile and provides a useful criterion for subclassifying hCCA. This contextual framework shows that hCCA-M and hCCA-NM represent biologically distinct tumor groups.