Zhang, Xiaodan

AbstractGenetic risk factors for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) remain poorly understood. We assessed the effect of single‐nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of genes modulating inflammation or carcinogenesis on CCA risk and survival. We conducted a case‐control, candidate gene association study of 370 CCA patients and 740 age‐, sex‐, and residential area‐matched healthy controls. Eighteen functional or putatively functional SNPs in nine genes were genotyped. The log‐additive genotype effects of SNPs on CCA risk and survival were determined using logistic regression and the log‐rank test, respectively. Initial analysis identified significant associations between SNP rs2143417 and rs689466 in cyclooxygenase 2 (COX‐2) and CCA risk, after adjusting for multiple comparisons (cutoff of P = 0.0028). However, these findings were not replicated in another independent cohort of 212 CCA cases and 424 matched controls. No significant association was found between any SNP and survival of CCA patients. Although COX‐2 has been shown to contribute to cholangiocarcinogenesis, the COX‐2 SNPs tested were not associated with risk of CCA. This study shows a lack of association between variants of genes related to inflammation and carcinogenesis and CCA risk and survival. Other factors than these genetic variants may play more important roles in CCA risk and survival.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in blood are associated with poor survival of patients with breast, prostate, or colon cancer. We hypothesized that CTCs are associated with poor survival of patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Eighty‐eight patients with CCA were prospectively enrolled at Mayo Clinic Rochester between June 2010 and September 2014. The CellSearch system by Veridex was used for detection of CTCs in peripheral blood. Associations between CTC, patient and tumor characteristics, and survival were examined using the Cox's proportional hazards model. Fifteen patients (17%) were positive for CTC ≥2 and 8 patients (9%) for CTC ≥5. CTCs were associated with tumor extent. CTC ≥2 (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1‐5.4; P = 0.02) and CTC ≥5 (HR, 4.1; 95% CI: 1.4‐10.8; P = 0.01) were both independent predictors of survival. In subgroup analyses, CTC ≥2 (HR, 8.2; 95% CI: 1.8‐57.5; P < 0.01) and CTC ≥5 (HR, 7.7; 95% CI: 1.4‐42.9; P = 0.02) were both associated with shorter survival among patients with metastasis. There was a trend toward association of CTC ≥5 with shorter survival in patients with nonmetastatic CCA (HR, 4.3; 95% CI: 1.0‐13.8; P = 0.06). CTC ≥2 (HR, 10.5; 95% CI: 2.2‐40.1; P < 0.01) and CTC ≥5 (HR, 10.2; 95% CI: 1.5‐42.3; P = 0.02) were both associated with shorter survival among patients with perihilar/distal CCA. CTC ≥5 was associated with shorter survival of patients with intrahepatic CCA (HR, 4.2; 95% CI: 1.1‐14.1; P = 0.04). Conclusion: CTCs were associated with more‐aggressive tumor characteristics and independently associated with survival in patients with CCA. Assessment of CTCs may be useful for identifying CCA patients at risk of early mortality. (Hepatology 2016;63:148–158)