Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleExperimental Studies
Open Access

Development of a Prognostic Score for Cholangiocarcinoma Patients Using a Combination of Biochemical Parameters

HTET HTET MIN-OO, TIN MAY AUNG, MOLIN WONGWATTANAKUL, PORNSUDA MARAMING, TANAKORN PROUNGVITAYA and SIRIPORN PROUNGVITAYA
In Vivo May 2023, 37 (3) 1145-1155; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.13189
HTET HTET MIN-OO
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TIN MAY AUNG
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MOLIN WONGWATTANAKUL
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
2Center for Innovation and Standard for Medical Technology and Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
PORNSUDA MARAMING
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TANAKORN PROUNGVITAYA
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SIRIPORN PROUNGVITAYA
1Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostic Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand;
3Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute (CARI), Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sirpat{at}kku.ac.th
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: Prognosis of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), especially of intrahepatic CCA (iCCA), is poor primarily due to difficulties in earlier diagnosis. Since the majority of iCCA patients are elders, their prognosis cannot be correctly predicted by pathological features and/or resection status alone. Consideration for comorbidity and/or risks of subclinical diseases at diagnosis is critically necessary for the prediction of prognosis of iCCA patients. This study aimed to develop a simple but reliable scoring system for prognosis of iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis. Patients and Methods: Serum samples from 152 iCCA patients were collected, and four commonly used biochemical markers, serum aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, cystatin C and creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate were measured. Then, the values of individual patients were scored as 0, 1, and 2 (low, medium, and high) by tertiles or clinically relevant cut-off points and summed to construct a prognostic score with a range between 0 to 8. Results: Patients with high scores of 2-4 and 5-8 exhibited significantly shorter survival times compared to those with low scores of 0-1 (Chi-square: 15.75, p<0.001). Cox regression analysis suggested that the score could be an independent predictor for the survival of iCCA patients. The odds of advanced tumor stage in high score iCCA patients (2-4 and 5-8) were 12.310 (95%CI=2.241-67.605) and 23.964 (95%CI=3.296-174.216), respectively. This scoring system allowed further stratification of death rates per 100 person-years of iCCA patients. Conclusion: The ability of such a simple scoring system to discriminate risk might be helpful for iCCA patients to determine therapeutic programs at the time of diagnosis.

Key Words:
  • Cholangiocarcinoma
  • biochemical parameters
  • scoring system
  • survival prognosis

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most prevalent type of primary liver cancer, and its mortality tends to increase globally (1, 2). In general, intrahepatic CCA (iCCA) accounts for approximately 10% of CCA. In our study area of the Northeast Thailand, however, the proportion of iCCA is extremely high due to the association of infection with carcinogenic liver fluke, Opisthorchis viverrini, which mainly parasitizes the intrahepatic bile ducts (3). Most iCCAs are asymptomatic and difficult to diagnose at the early stage and are usually lethal due to delayed diagnosis and the lack of appropriate non-surgical treatment modalities (1, 4). At the time of diagnosis, most patients have unresectable diseases that are difficult to treat (5). In fact, the median survival of iCCA patients is approximately 28 months after supportive treatment, and the 5-year overall survival is approximately 30% (6).

Numerous prognostic scores based on clinical features and histological status have been developed to predict the survival of iCCA patients, which are helpful to a certain degree to improve the prognosis after hepatectomy. Recently, several prognostic scores were developed in iCCA studies; (i) the Fudan score based on serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), the tumor boundary type, the number and diameter of intrahepatic tumors (7), (ii) the MEGNA score based on age>60 years, tumor grading, lymph node metastasis, multifocality and extrahepatic tumor extension (8) and (iii) preoperative risk model based on tumor size, CA19-9, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and serum albumin (9). Nevertheless, none of these scoring methods performed well enough to allow accurate clinical decisions. In addition, some pathological features used in those scoring systems are not available from most of iCCA patients in Thailand at the time of diagnosis. These prognostic systems are, thus, not routinely used at an early stage and their prognostic values are still controversial. Moreover, there may be other confounding factors that influence the survival of iCCA patients. For example, Qu et al. (2020) reported that the age adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index developed on clinically recognized diseases could predict survival in iCCA patients after curative resection (10). However, it is questionable whether iCCA patients who do not have recognizable diseases can have risks of substantial subclinical diseases, which impact mortality and survival.

In our study area and neighboring Great Mekong Subregions, iCCA patients are exclusively senior persons because CCA is caused by chronic infection with carcinogenic liver fluke, Opisthorchis viverrini. Thus, not only comorbidity, but also general health status including subclinical diseases should be considered for the prediction of prognosis. Also, in general, cancers including CCA affect the metabolism and of not only the targeted organs (11) but also of the whole-body including vital organs such as the heart, liver, kidney, and central nervous systems. Thus, for the prediction of prognosis of iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis, consideration for the risks of pre-existing health conditions or subclinical diseases related to these organs is critically necessary before starting treatment.

In this study, therefore, we aimed to develop a new scoring system that provides a simple and effective prediction of the prognosis of iCCA patients at the time of CCA diagnosis. For this purpose, we selected four routinely used biochemical parameters in the sera of iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis: Aspartate aminotransaminase (AST), Alkaline phosphatase (ALP), Cystatin C (Cys C) and Creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFRcr) (AACC). These biochemical markers potentially indicate underlying subclinical diseases across four organ systems such as cardiovascular (12-14), liver (15, 16), nervous system (17-19), and kidneys (20, 21). The values of these four markers of each iCCA patient were converted to tertile score and the sum of the scores (ranging from 0 to 8) was taken as the prognostic score, termed as the AACC score. Then, we collected the retrospective clinical data of iCCA patients and examined the association of the prognostic score and clinicopathological features using Kaplan-Meier test, log-rank test, Cox and logistic regression analysis. The results show that this simple and easy-to-use prognostic scoring system could help clinicians to predict prognosis and to stratify the risk of outcomes regardless of histopathological features of iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis.

Patients and Methods

Sample size calculation. To determine the sample size required to establish the prognostic score, the preliminary study was performed using iCCA patients’ data (n=82) from our previous study (22). The sample size was calculated using the G*Power program (version 3.1.9.7, the G*Power team, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany) (23). With the assumption of correlation coefficient=0.32, alpha=0.05 and power=0.8 (beta=0.2), the minimum sample size was calculated to be 75 samples with the actual power of 0.95 in this study.

Data and sample collection for iCCA patients. Serum samples from 152 iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis (median±quartile deviation, 64±8.3 years, range=31-83 years) were kindly provided by the Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute (CARI), Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. All the patients were positive for O. viverrini infection either by coproparasitological or serological tests. The inclusion criteria were diagnosis of iCCA by clinicopathological examinations either by biopsy or intraoperative rapid diagnosis including immunohistochemistry for CD56. Classification and staging of iCCA followed the AJCC/UICC 8th edition (24). Exclusion criteria included previous history of surgical treatment (including preoperative biliary drainage) or chemotherapy, and other cancers including concurrent double cancers or extrahepatic CCA. All selected patients had clinical background information including vital status, survival days and spreading status for retrospective analysis. This retrospective study was approved by the Khon Kaen University Ethics Committee for Human Research and performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the ICH Good Clinical Practice Guidelines (HE641324). Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Serum Cystatin C (Cys C) measurement. Serum Cys C was measured using the Latex-Particles enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay kit (Diazyme, Poway, CA, USA). Cys C in the sample binds to the specific anti-Cys C antibody, which is coated on latex particles, and causes agglutination. The degree of the turbidity caused by agglutination was measured optically and the Cys C concentration of patient’s specimens was calculated using a calibration curve constructed from 6-point concentration ranges of 0.52 to 8.15 mg/l. The standard high and low concentrations of Cys C provided by the manufacturer were used as internal quality controls.

Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculation. eGFRcr was calculated based on the serum creatinine level using a modified version of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI), 2021 (25).

Components of the sore. The values of AST, ALP, Cys C, and eGFRcr in the serum of 152 iCCA patients were used to create our AACC score system. The components of the scoring system were chosen based on previous reports where each component was shown to have the potential to be used clinically for risk prediction of mortality or subclinical diseases (please, see the last paragraph of the introduction). Although these noninvasive tests may not represent identical phenotypes of the organ system, they can be general indicators or disease related variables.

To construct the score, each of the components except for eGFRcr was classified into three categories using tertile cut points of iCCA patients; score 0 (low), score 1 (medium), and score 2 (high). Clinically relevant cut-off points were used to categorize eGFRcr. The detailed score values are shown in (Table I). The AACC score was constructed as the sum of the scores of 4 components, ranging from 0 to 8.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

The score values of the components.

Statistical analysis. The median±quartile deviation (minimum to maximum) was used for the description of non-normally distributed data. We estimated the median AACC scores of iCCA patients and the relative frequencies of the patients in each score of 0 to 8. In iCCA patients, the association between the three groups of AACC score (0-1, 2-4, and 5-8) and clinicopathological characteristics was analyzed using the Chi-square test. The overall survival curves were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier test and log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to determine the association of the AACC score with overall survival. We calculated the death rates per 100 person-years across score groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the odds of outcomes. p<0.05 was considered as statistical significance. All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS version 28 Statistics (The International Business Machines Corporation, Charles Randlett Flint, Armonk, NY, USA) and GraphPad Prism version 5 software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA).

Results

Clinicopathological characteristics of iCCA patients. The clinicopathological characteristics of 152 iCCA patients are shown in Table II. A total of 106 patients were male and 46 females: with a median age of 64 years. The median value of serum ALT, ALP, AST, Cys C, CA19-9, and CEA of iCCA patients were significantly higher than the upper limit of the normal value. The eGFRcr median value was lower than the upper limit of the normal value.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Clinicopathological characteristics of the intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Distribution of the AACC scores. The distribution pattern of the AACC score was quite broad with slight skewing toward lower values. The frequency of patients having a score of 0 and 8 was very low (Figure 1A). The median±quartile deviation of the AACC score of iCCA patients was 4.0±1.5 (score range 0 to 8). Then, we categorized the AACC score into three groups as 0-1, 2-4, and 5-8. Among iCCA patients, 11.2% of them are in the AACC score of 0-1, 58.6% in the score of 2-4, and 30.2% in the score of 5-8 (Figure 1B).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Distribution patterns of the AACC Score of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) patients (n=152). (A) According to score 0 to 8, (B) according to grouped scores of 0-1, 2-4, and 5-8.

Association of the AACC score with clinicopathological characteristics of iCCA patients. To determine the clinical importance of the AACC score, we analyzed the association between three AACC score groups (0-1, 2-4, and 5-8) and clinicopathological characteristics of iCCA patients. The results showed that significant differences were observed between different AACC score groups and the preoperative levels of total bilirubin (p<0.001), direct bilirubin (p<0.001), ALT (p=0.009), ALP (p=0.014), AST (p<0.001), creatinine (p<0.001), eGFRcr (p<0.001), Cys C (p<0.001) and albumin (p=0.036). Patients in the higher score group (2-8) had significantly shorter survival, compared with those of the low score group (0-1) (p<0.001). Also, lymph node metastasis and advanced tumor stage were more frequently presented in the higher score groups (2-4 and 5-8). However, there were no significant differences between score groups in terms of sex, age, serum CA19-9, serum CEA and vascular invasion (Table III).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Association of AACC score with clinicopathological characteristics of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Potential predictivity of the AACC score for overall survival of iCCA patients. To examine whether the AACC score can predict the prognosis of iCCA patients, we analyzed the overall survival of patients of each score group using the Kaplan-Meier curve with a log-rank test. The results indicated that the survival time of iCCA patients in the higher AACC score groups (2-4 and 5-8) was significantly shorter than that of patients in the low score group (0-1) (Chi-square: 15.75, p<0.001) (Figure 2). Moreover, significant difference in the survival time was observed between patients with a AACC score of 0-1 and 2-4 (p=0.012), 2-4 and 5-8 (p=0.017) and 0-1 and 5-8 (p<0.001) (Figure 2). Our results showed that the higher the levels of the AACC score, the shorter the overall survival time. Hence, the AACC score can well predict the overall survival time of iCCA patients without additional information.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival time of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) patients. The cases were assigned to the AACC Score (0-1; green line), (2-4; yellow line) and (5- 8; red line) groups. There was a significant difference in the survival time between each score group (p<0.001), 0-1 and 2-4 (p=0.012), 2-4 and 5-8 (p=0.017), 0-1 and 5-8 (p<0.001) by log-rank test.

To identify the independent predictors that were correlated with overall survival of iCCA patients, we determined the hazard ratio (HR) of each score group using Cox’s univariate and multivariate hazard models. On univariate analysis, patients with AACC score 2-4 (HR=3.596, 95%CI=1.291-10.015) and score 5-8 (HR=6.157, 95%CI=2.161-17.542) were independently associated with overall survival. Moreover, multivariable analysis revealed that the patients in the highest score group (5-8) have an almost five-fold risk of shorter survival compared to those in the low score group (0-1). Among AACC components, Cys C and eGFRcr scores have significant prognostic values for overall survival compared with AST and ALP scores of iCCA patients (Table IV).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of clinical predictors for overall survival of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Association between the AACC score and the outcomes of iCCA patients. To evaluate further the potential of the AACC score to predict prognosis of iCCA patients, we examined the correlation of the AACC score with the risk of outcomes (vascular invasion, lymph node metastasis and tumor stage) of iCCA patients (Table V). The results showed that the relationship between the score and tumor stage persisted in multivariable analysis. Patients in the score group of 2-4 and 5-8 had 12.31 times and 23.964 times, respectively, higher odds of advanced tumor stage compared with those in the low score group (0-1). The score had no association with vascular invasion and lymph node metastasis of iCCA patients. Moreover, within the AACC score group, death rates associated with a score of 0-1, 2-4, and 5-8 were 7.55, 29.08, and 52.03 (per 100 person-years), respectively (Figure 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table V.

Association between the AACC score and the outcomes of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Death events across the AACC score among intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) patients (n=152). 95% confidence interval was 2.83-20.12 for patients with a score of 0-1, 21.78-38.83 for patients with a score of 2-4, 36.79-73.58 for patients with a score of 5-8.

Discussion

In this study, we constructed and evaluated a simple and clinically applicable prognostic scoring system for iCCA patients using the combined score of biochemical markers, namely AST, ALP, Cys C, and eGFRcr at the time of diagnosis. The results showed that this simple scoring system, named AACC score, can predict overall survival and discriminate risks at the time of diagnosis of iCCA patients.

Prediction of the long-term survival benefit is crucial for treatment options and is potentially associated with subclinical diseases that generally have poor prognosis. Noticeably, cancer affects the entire metabolism of the body rather than just the targeted organs, and therefore, cancer can have an impact on important organs including the heart, liver, and kidneys, and the nervous system and other organ systems (11). Also, it is possible that the assessment of cancer consequences at the time of diagnosis could be extended to blood biochemical tests to distinguish between low risk and very high-risk treatment options. Therefore, we chose simple biochemical parameters that reflect deterioration of other vital organ systems rather than the targeted organ, which can be applicable to all iCCA patients at diagnosis. We also hypothesized that the simple AACC scoring system might provide an effective prediction of prognosis and discriminate the risk level of iCCA patients before treatment. Each component used to construct AACC score has the potential for risk prediction of mortality, comorbidities or subclinical diseases and has been studied for prognostic prediction in cancer and in CCA (21, 26-32). For example, serum AST was the first biochemical parameter used for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the past, although this enzyme is mostly found in the liver (33). When using the De Ritis ratio (AST/ALT ratio), high AST level is a significant predictor for long-term risk compared with ALT (34). Regarding ALP, the elevation of its serum levels is the most common comorbid condition associated with not only iCCA but also hepatobiliary diseases such as hepatitis, bile ducts obstruction (obstructive jaundice), primary sclerosis cholangitis, choledocholithiasis, gall stones, cirrhosis and even a prognostic risk factor for cancer patients other than CCA (15, 16, 35, 36). The component Cys C belongs to the cystatin superfamily and is a cystine protease inhibitor. Besides being recognized as a novel renal function biomarker, Cys C is considered an independent prediction marker of common comorbid conditions such as neurological disorders including Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias (17, 18, 37). In addition, increase of circulating Cys levels are generally associated with poor clinical outcomes and poor prognosis in various malignancies such as breast (38, 39), ovarian (40), prostate (41), head and neck (30, 42), CCA (31), renal (32) and esophageal (43) cancers. The eGFRcr component is useful in clinical practice to determine the degree of kidney failure and to monitor the progression of the disease (21). In accordance with these previous findings, our score components represented reasonably the possibility of comorbid complications from distinct organ systems among iCCA patients. Therefore, we hypothesized that the combination of the scores of these components (AACC score) may be of interest to iCCA researchers and might provide an opportunity for a better understanding of optimal health and comorbid complications as risk factors of prognosis when evaluating the prognosis of iCCA patients. In the present study, we found that only 11.2% of iCCA patients were classified in the low AACC score group (0-1, low risk) with long survival and low prognosis risk. Our results showed that higher the score due to higher level of preoperative AST, ALT, eGFRcr, and Cys C values may indirectly associate with the poor survival and high prognosis risk in iCCA patients.

Recently, researchers developed several prognostic scores such as the Fudan score (7) and the MEGNA score (8) based on pathological features to predict the survival of iCCA patients. They showed that their score had prognostic value for prediction of overall survival and outcomes of iCCA patients. However, they could not distinguish between those who were at high or low risks. Our study revealed that the score using a combination of biochemical parameters at the time of diagnosis has a strong association with overall survival and advanced tumor stage of iCCA patients.

This simple and easy scoring system using the combination of the four clinical bio-chemical parameters at the time of diagnosis provides a powerful prediction value for overall survival and better discrimination of the risk outcomes of iCCA patients. We also showed that iCCA patients in the lower score group (0-1, low risk) had longer expected survival than those in higher score groups (2-4 and 5-8). Our results using the Cox hazard model and multivariate analysis suggested that the score was an independent prognostic factor for the overall survival. Also, the score was able to predict the risk of advanced tumor stage of iCCA patients and the odds of this outcome were highest in the score group of 5-8. Besides, lymph node metastasis and advanced tumor stage were observed in high-score groups such as 2-4 and 5-8 (p=0.03 and p=0.008 respectively) (Table III). Additionally, this scoring system could discriminate the death rates per 100 person-years across score categories. These findings indicate that our AACC scoring system can effectively stratify iCCA patients including low risk patients having no apparent chronic diseases based on simple risk assessments. Our study provides important results because the indicators used in the scoring system have potential value for prediction risk of subclinical diseases and prognosis. The two components of the score (Cys C and eGFRcr) might be stronger predictors of survival than the other two, because Cys C and eGFRcr may integrate many processes that contribute to poor prognosis of iCCA patients. For example, Cys C may represent many organ dysfunctions, such as cognitive impairment, inflammation, and stroke; eGFRcr may reflect kidney dysfunction and treatment complications. Although AST and ALP levels of iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis were often extremely high, they seem to be weaker predictors because they are confounded by medical treatments for myocardial infarction, obstructive jaundice etc., whereas only few preoperative treatments affect Cys C and eGFRcr levels. Both AST and ALP may indicate early detection of comorbid conditions and can impact risk for poor survival; though it would be difficult to know if high values were due to the presence of asymptomatic comorbid diseases or due to cancer-treatment complications.

Very recently our team found that CCDC-25 protein is over-expressed in CCA tissues and elevated serum CCDC-25 level can be a unique bio-diagnostic marker for CCA (44, 45). Since higher serum CCDC-25 level is associated with longer survival of CCA patients (45), integration of CCDC-25 in our AACC prognostic scoring system reported here should be considered in future for further improvement of the system.

The limitation of this study is the lack of detailed information regarding the tumors, such as tumor size, tumor boundary type, residual tumor classification and history of clinically recognized diseases, which have an impact on the prognosis of iCCA patients. Also, since the parameters used for scoring are related to general health conditions or organ related subclinical diseases, the applicability of this AACC score to predict the prognosis of other malignancies should be examined.

In summary, the AACC score provides a useful tool to identify iCCA patients with low risk prognosis. In addition, the characteristics of easy-to-use cut-points and reasonable values for prognosis risk suggest that our new score may be useful in clinical research such as risk assessment, cancer care management and prediction of asymptomatic subclinical disease among cancer patients and in iCCA. We also hope that pathological information together with our prognostic score may help the physician in the decision for treatment regimens. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on a prognostic scoring system using organ related biochemical parameters at the time of diagnosis of iCCA to predict survival and stratify prognostic risk of iCCA patients independent of pathological features.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the AACC score was identified as an independent prognostic score for prediction of overall survival and stratification of risk of outcomes in iCCA patients at the time of diagnosis. However, whether our proposed scoring system can perform well when evaluating the survival benefits of iCCA patients throughout treatment needs external validation with prospective studies or clinical evaluation studies.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by NSRF under the Basic Research Fund of the Cholangiocarcinoma Research Institute and a KKU Scholarship for ASEAN and GMS countries’ personnel of Academic Year 2020, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. We would like to thank Professor Yukifumi Nawa (Tropical Disease Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University) for his editorial works on the manuscript, along with the KKU Publication Clinic of the Research Affairs. Also, the Authors appreciate the kind operation of Muntinee Lertpanprom for data collection and laboratory work.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    Conceptualization, M.W., P.M., T.P. and S.P.; methodology, H.H.M.-O. and S.P.; formal analysis, H.H.M.O. and S.P.; investigation, H.H.M.O.; T.P. and S.P.; data curation, H.H.M.O. and S.P.; writing-original draft preparation, H.H.M.O.; writing—review and editing, T.P., T.M.A. and S.P.; funding acquisition, S.P. All Authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

  • Funding

    This project was supported by a KKU Grant and a Research Fund from the Centre of Research and Development of Medical Diagnostics Laboratories (CMDL), Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors declare no conflicts of interest in relation to this study.

  • Received February 17, 2023.
  • Revision received March 16, 2023.
  • Accepted March 17, 2023.
  • Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by the International Institute of Anticancer Research.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 international license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

References

  1. ↵
    1. Buettner S,
    2. van Vugt JL,
    3. IJzermans JN and
    4. Groot Koerkamp B
    : Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: current perspectives. Onco Targets Ther 10: 1131-1142, 2017. PMID: 28260927. DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S93629
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Bertuccio P,
    2. Malvezzi M,
    3. Carioli G,
    4. Hashim D,
    5. Boffetta P,
    6. El-Serag HB,
    7. La Vecchia C and
    8. Negri E
    : Global trends in mortality from intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol 71(1): 104-114, 2019. PMID: 30910538. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2019.03.013
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Shin HR,
    2. Oh JK,
    3. Masuyer E,
    4. Curado MP,
    5. Bouvard V,
    6. Fang Y,
    7. Wiangnon S,
    8. Sripa B and
    9. Hong ST
    : Comparison of incidence of intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma—focus on East and South-Eastern Asia. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 11(5): 1159-1166, 2010. PMID: 21198257.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Guro H,
    2. Kim JW,
    3. Choi Y,
    4. Cho JY,
    5. Yoon YS and
    6. Han HS
    : Multidisciplinary management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Current approaches. Surg Oncol 26(2): 146-152, 2017. PMID: 28577720. DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2017.03.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Konstantinidis IT,
    2. Groot Koerkamp B,
    3. Do RK,
    4. Gönen M,
    5. Fong Y,
    6. Allen PJ,
    7. D’Angelica MI,
    8. Kingham TP,
    9. DeMatteo RP,
    10. Klimstra DS,
    11. Kemeny NE and
    12. Jarnagin WR
    : Unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Systemic plus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy is associated with longer survival in comparison with systemic chemotherapy alone. Cancer 122(5): 758-765, 2016. PMID: 26695839. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29824
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Mavros MN,
    2. Economopoulos KP,
    3. Alexiou VG and
    4. Pawlik TM
    : Treatment and prognosis for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 149(6): 565-574, 2014. PMID: 24718873. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5137
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Jiang W,
    2. Zeng ZC,
    3. Tang ZY,
    4. Fan J,
    5. Sun HC,
    6. Zhou J,
    7. Zeng MS,
    8. Zhang BH,
    9. Ji Y and
    10. Chen YX
    : A prognostic scoring system based on clinical features of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the Fudan score. Ann Oncol 22(7): 1644-1652, 2011. PMID: 21212156. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq650
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Raoof M,
    2. Dumitra S,
    3. Ituarte PHG,
    4. Melstrom L,
    5. Warner SG,
    6. Fong Y and
    7. Singh G
    : Development and validation of a prognostic score for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. JAMA Surg 152(5): e170117, 2017. PMID: 28297009. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0117
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Sasaki K,
    2. Margonis GA,
    3. Andreatos N,
    4. Bagante F,
    5. Weiss M,
    6. Barbon C,
    7. Popescu I,
    8. Marques HP,
    9. Aldrighetti L,
    10. Maithel SK,
    11. Pulitano C,
    12. Bauer TW,
    13. Shen F,
    14. Poultsides GA,
    15. Soubrane O,
    16. Martel G,
    17. Koerkamp BG,
    18. Guglielmi A,
    19. Itaru E,
    20. Aucejo FN and
    21. Pawlik TM
    : Preoperative risk score and prediction of long-term outcomes after hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 226(4): 393-403, 2018. PMID: 29274841. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.12.011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Qu WF,
    2. Zhou PY,
    3. Liu WR,
    4. Tian MX,
    5. Jin L,
    6. Jiang XF,
    7. Wang H,
    8. Tao CY,
    9. Fang Y,
    10. Zhou YF,
    11. Song SS,
    12. Ding ZB,
    13. Peng YF,
    14. Dai Z,
    15. Qiu SJ,
    16. Zhou J,
    17. Fan J,
    18. Tang Z and
    19. Shi YH
    : Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index predicts survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients after curative resection. Ann Transl Med 8(7): 487, 2020. PMID: 32395531. DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.23
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Patel T
    : Cholangiocarcinoma. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 3(1): 33-42, 2006. PMID: 16397610. DOI: 10.1038/ncpgasthep0389
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Lee H,
    2. Shin DW,
    3. Lee TH,
    4. Yang HK,
    5. Ahn E,
    6. Yoon JM,
    7. Lee HK,
    8. Suh B,
    9. Son KY,
    10. Kim JS and
    11. Cho B
    : Association between change in serum aminotransferase and mortality: a nationwide cohort study in Korea. Medicine (Baltimore) 95(12): e3158, 2016. PMID: 27015199. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003158
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Gao M,
    2. Cheng Y,
    3. Zheng Y,
    4. Zhang W,
    5. Wang L and
    6. Qin L
    : Association of serum transaminases with short- and long-term outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 17(1): 43, 2017. PMID: 28129742. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-017-0485-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Xie K,
    2. Chen CH,
    3. Tsai SP,
    4. Lu PJ,
    5. Wu H,
    6. Zeng Y,
    7. Ye Y,
    8. Tu H,
    9. Wen C,
    10. Huang M,
    11. Zhang Y,
    12. Lee JH,
    13. Tsai MK,
    14. Wen CP and
    15. Wu X
    : Loss of life expectancy by 10 years or more from elevated aspartate aminotransferase: Finding aspartate aminotransferase a better mortality predictor for all-cause and liver-related than alanine aminotransferase. Am J Gastroenterol 114(9): 1478-1487, 2019. PMID: 31425154. DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000332
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Bakhshi Z,
    2. Hilscher MB,
    3. Gores GJ,
    4. Harmsen WS,
    5. Viehman JK,
    6. LaRusso NF,
    7. Gossard AA,
    8. Lazaridis KN,
    9. Lindor KD and
    10. Eaton JE
    : An update on primary sclerosing cholangitis epidemiology, outcomes and quantification of alkaline phosphatase variability in a population-based cohort. J Gastroenterol 55(5): 523-532, 2020. PMID: 31932891. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-020-01663-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Hilscher M,
    2. Enders FB,
    3. Carey EJ,
    4. Lindor KD and
    5. Tabibian JH
    : Alkaline phosphatase normalization is a biomarker of improved survival in primary sclerosing cholangitis. Ann Hepatol 15(2): 246-253, 2016. PMID: 26845602. DOI: 10.5604/16652681.1193721
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Mathews PM and
    2. Levy E
    : Cystatin C in aging and in Alzheimer’s disease. Ageing Res Rev 32: 38-50, 2016. PMID: 27333827. DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2016.06.003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Yaffe K,
    2. Kurella-Tamura M,
    3. Ackerson L,
    4. Hoang TD,
    5. Anderson AH,
    6. Duckworth M,
    7. Go AS,
    8. Krousel-Wood M,
    9. Kusek JW,
    10. Lash JP,
    11. Ojo A,
    12. Robinson N,
    13. Sehgal AR,
    14. Sondheimer JH,
    15. Steigerwalt S,
    16. Townsend RR and CRIC Study Investigators
    : Higher levels of cystatin C are associated with worse cognitive function in older adults with chronic kidney disease: the chronic renal insufficiency cohort cognitive study. J Am Geriatr Soc 62(9): 1623-1629, 2014. PMID: 25125225. DOI: 10.1111/jgs.12986
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Kim TJ,
    2. Kang MK,
    3. Jeong HG,
    4. Kim CK,
    5. Kim Y,
    6. Nam KW,
    7. Mo H,
    8. An SJ,
    9. Ko SB and
    10. Yoon BW
    : Cystatin C is a useful predictor of early neurological deterioration following ischaemic stroke in elderly patients with normal renal function. Eur Stroke J 2(1): 23-30, 2017. PMID: 31008299. DOI: 10.1177/2396987316677197
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Levey AS,
    2. Coresh J,
    3. Balk E,
    4. Kausz AT,
    5. Levin A,
    6. Steffes MW,
    7. Hogg RJ,
    8. Perrone RD,
    9. Lau J,
    10. Eknoyan G and National Kidney Foundation
    : National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 139(2): 137-147, 2003. PMID: 12859163. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-139-2-200307150-00013
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Stevens LA,
    2. Coresh J,
    3. Greene T and
    4. Levey AS
    : Assessing kidney function—measured and estimated glomerular filtration rate. N Engl J Med 354(23): 2473-2483, 2006. PMID: 16760447. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra054415
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Ciin MN,
    2. Proungvitaya T,
    3. Limpaiboon T,
    4. Roytrakul S,
    5. Cha’on U,
    6. Tummanatsakun D and
    7. Proungvitaya S
    : Serum cystatin C as a potential marker for glomerular filtration rate in patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Int J Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res 14(3): 157-166, 2020. PMID: 33024521. DOI: 10.18502/ijhoscr.v14i3.3723
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Faul F,
    2. Erdfelder E,
    3. Buchner A and
    4. Lang AG
    : Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41(4): 1149-1160, 2009. PMID: 19897823. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Liao X and
    2. Zhang D
    : The 8th edition American Joint Committee on cancer staging for hepato-pancreato-biliary cancer: a review and update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 145(5): 543-553, 2021. PMID: 32223559. DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2020-0032-RA
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    CKD-EPI Creatinine Equation (2021) | National Kidney Foundation. Available at: https://www.kidney.org/professionals/kdoqi/gfr_calculator/formula [Last accessed on March 17, 2023]
  25. ↵
    1. Jin J,
    2. Zhu P,
    3. Liao Y,
    4. Li J,
    5. Liao W and
    6. He S
    : Elevated preoperative aspartate aminotransferase to lymphocyte ratio index as an independent prognostic factor for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatic resection. Oncotarget 6(22): 19217-19227, 2015. PMID: 26057470. DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.4265
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Wu J,
    2. Chen L,
    3. Wang Y,
    4. Tan W and
    5. Huang Z
    : Prognostic value of aspartate transaminase to alanine transaminase (De Ritis) ratio in solid tumors: a pooled analysis of 9,400 patients. Onco Targets Ther 12: 5201-5213, 2019. PMID: 31308692. DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S204403
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Al Mamari S,
    2. Djordjevic J,
    3. Halliday JS and
    4. Chapman RW
    : Improvement of serum alkaline phosphatase to <1.5 upper limit of normal predicts better outcome and reduced risk of cholangiocarcinoma in primary sclerosing cholangitis. J Hepatol 58(2): 329-334, 2013. PMID: 23085647. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2012.10.013
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Bhudhisawasdi V,
    2. Muisuk K,
    3. Areejitranusorn P,
    4. Kularbkaew C,
    5. Khampitak T,
    6. Saeseow OT and
    7. Wongkham S
    : Clinical value of biliary alkaline phosphatase in non-jaundiced cholangiocarcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 130(2): 87-92, 2004. PMID: 14648209. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-003-0515-x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Yuan J,
    2. Xu M,
    3. Li J,
    4. Li N,
    5. Chen LZ,
    6. Feng QS and
    7. Zeng YX
    : Prognostic value of cystatin C in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a retrospective study of 1063 patients. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 71(6): 338-343, 2016. PMID: 27438568. DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2016(06)09
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Monsouvanh A,
    2. Proungvitaya T,
    3. Limpaiboon T,
    4. Wongkham C,
    5. Wongkham S,
    6. Luvira V and
    7. Proungvitaya S
    : Serum cathepsin B to cystatin C ratio as a potential marker for the diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15(21): 9511-9515, 2014. PMID: 25422248. DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.21.9511
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Guo S,
    2. Xue Y,
    3. He Q,
    4. He X,
    5. Guo K,
    6. Dong P,
    7. Yao K,
    8. Yang G,
    9. Chen D,
    10. Li Z,
    11. Li X,
    12. Qin Z,
    13. Liu Z,
    14. Cheng W,
    15. Guo C,
    16. Zhang M,
    17. Han H and
    18. Zhou F
    : Preoperative serum cystatin-C as a potential biomarker for prognosis of renal cell carcinoma. PLoS One 12(6): e0178823, 2017. PMID: 28586363. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178823
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Ladue JS,
    2. Wroblewski F and
    3. Karmen A
    : Serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase activity in human acute transmural myocardial infarction. Science 120(3117): 497-499, 1954. PMID: 13195683. DOI: 10.1126/science.120.3117.497
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    1. Steininger M,
    2. Winter MP,
    3. Reiberger T,
    4. Koller L,
    5. El-Hamid F,
    6. Forster S,
    7. Schnaubelt S,
    8. Hengstenberg C,
    9. Distelmaier K,
    10. Goliasch G,
    11. Wojta J,
    12. Toma A,
    13. Niessner A and
    14. Sulzgruber P
    : De-Ritis ratio improves long-term risk prediction after acute myocardial infarction. J Clin Med 7(12): 474, 2018. PMID: 30477196. DOI: 10.3390/jcm7120474
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Wiwanitkit V
    : High serum alkaline phosphatase levels, a study in 181 Thai adult hospitalized patients. BMC Fam Pract 2: 2, 2001. PMID: 11545676. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-2-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Eun JR,
    2. Jang BI,
    3. Lee JY,
    4. Kim KO,
    5. Lee SH,
    6. Kim TN and
    7. Lee HJ
    : [Clinical characteristics of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and prognostic factors in patients who received non-surgical treatment]. Korean J Gastroenterol 54(4): 227-234, 2009. PMID: 19844142. DOI: 10.4166/kjg.2009.54.4.227
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Shlipak MG,
    2. Wassel Fyr CL,
    3. Chertow GM,
    4. Harris TB,
    5. Kritchevsky SB,
    6. Tylavsky FA,
    7. Satterfield S,
    8. Cummings SR,
    9. Newman AB and
    10. Fried LF
    : Cystatin C and mortality risk in the elderly: the health, aging, and body composition study. J Am Soc Nephrol 17(1): 254-261, 2006. PMID: 16267155. DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2005050545
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    1. Decock J,
    2. Obermajer N,
    3. Vozelj S,
    4. Hendrickx W,
    5. Paridaens R and
    6. Kos J
    : Cathepsin B, cathepsin H, cathepsin X and cystatin C in sera of patients with early-stage and inflammatory breast cancer. Int J Biol Markers 23(3): 161-168, 2008. PMID: 18949742. DOI: 10.1177/172460080802300305
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Leto G,
    2. Incorvaia L,
    3. Flandina C,
    4. Ancona C,
    5. Fulfaro F,
    6. Crescimanno M,
    7. Sepporta MV and
    8. Badalamenti G
    : Clinical impact of Cystatin C/Cathepsin L and Follistatin/Activin A systems in breast cancer progression: a preliminary report. Cancer Invest 34(9): 415-423, 2016. PMID: 27636861. DOI: 10.1080/07357907.2016.1222416
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Kolwijck E,
    2. Kos J,
    3. Obermajer N,
    4. Span PN,
    5. Thomas CM,
    6. Massuger LF and
    7. Sweep FC
    : The balance between extracellular cathepsins and cystatin C is of importance for ovarian cancer. Eur J Clin Invest 40(7): 591-599, 2010. PMID: 20482593. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2010.02305.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Larkin SE,
    2. Johnston HE,
    3. Jackson TR,
    4. Jamieson DG,
    5. Roumeliotis TI,
    6. Mockridge CI,
    7. Michael A,
    8. Manousopoulou A,
    9. Papachristou EK,
    10. Brown MD,
    11. Clarke NW,
    12. Pandha H,
    13. Aukim-Hastie CL,
    14. Cragg MS,
    15. Garbis SD and
    16. Townsend PA
    : Detection of candidate biomarkers of prostate cancer progression in serum: a depletion-free 3D LC/MS quantitative proteomics pilot study. Br J Cancer 115(9): 1078-1086, 2016. PMID: 27685442. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.291
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Strojan P,
    2. Oblak I,
    3. Svetic B,
    4. Smid L and
    5. Kos J
    : Cysteine proteinase inhibitor cystatin C in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: relation to prognosis. Br J Cancer 90(10): 1961-1968, 2004. PMID: 15138478. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601830
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Yan Y,
    2. Zhou K,
    3. Wang L,
    4. Wang F,
    5. Chen X and
    6. Fan Q
    : Clinical significance of serum cathepsin B and cystatin C levels and their ratio in the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer. Onco Targets Ther 10: 1947-1954, 2017. PMID: 28435284. DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S123042
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Chanakankun R,
    2. Proungvitaya T,
    3. Chua-On D,
    4. Limpaiboon T,
    5. Roytrakul S,
    6. Jusakul A,
    7. Titapun A,
    8. Jarearnrat A and
    9. Proungvitaya S
    : Serum coiled-coil domain containing 25 protein as a potential screening/diagnostic biomarker for cholangiocarcinoma. Oncol Lett 19(1): 930-942, 2020. PMID: 31897206. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.11162
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Jannawan A,
    2. Silsirivanit A,
    3. Seubwai W,
    4. Wongwattanakul M,
    5. Proungvitaya T,
    6. Aung TM,
    7. Roytrakul S,
    8. Chiawiriyabunya I and
    9. Proungvitaya S
    : High level of serum coiled-coil domain containing 25 (CCDC25) as a diagnostic marker for cholangiocarcinoma but not for other cancers. In Vivo 37(1): 294-303, 2023. PMID: 36593058. DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13079
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo: 37 (3)
In Vivo
Vol. 37, Issue 3
May-June 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Development of a Prognostic Score for Cholangiocarcinoma Patients Using a Combination of Biochemical Parameters
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
8 + 12 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Development of a Prognostic Score for Cholangiocarcinoma Patients Using a Combination of Biochemical Parameters
HTET HTET MIN-OO, TIN MAY AUNG, MOLIN WONGWATTANAKUL, PORNSUDA MARAMING, TANAKORN PROUNGVITAYA, SIRIPORN PROUNGVITAYA
In Vivo May 2023, 37 (3) 1145-1155; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13189

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Development of a Prognostic Score for Cholangiocarcinoma Patients Using a Combination of Biochemical Parameters
HTET HTET MIN-OO, TIN MAY AUNG, MOLIN WONGWATTANAKUL, PORNSUDA MARAMING, TANAKORN PROUNGVITAYA, SIRIPORN PROUNGVITAYA
In Vivo May 2023, 37 (3) 1145-1155; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13189
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

  • The Dominant Component and Clinicopathological Characteristics of Combined Hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma After Radical Resection
  • Serum CCDC25 Levels as a Potential Marker for Metabolic Syndrome
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Association of Transforming Growth Factor-β1 and α-Smooth Muscle Actin in Experimental Selective Obstructive Cholestasis
  • Time-course Investigation of Bone and Disc Degeneration in a Rat Model of Pyogenic Spondylodiscitis
  • Plasma Exosomal miR-106b-5p Is Associated With Osteoporosis by Targeting SMAD5, BMP2, and MAPK1 Genes
Show more Experimental Studies

Keywords

  • cholangiocarcinoma
  • biochemical parameters
  • scoring system
  • survival prognosis
In Vivo

© 2026 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire