Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:54:36.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - Image-guided therapy of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

from Section III - Organ-specific cancers – primary liver cancers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2016

Michael C. Soulen
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
William S. Rilling
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology
Jean-Francois H. Geschwind
Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine, Connecticut
Michael C. Soulen
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia
Get access

Summary

Our understanding and management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma have evolved substantially over the past 5 years, leading to a new staging system distinct from that used for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and identification of prognostic imaging and histologic phenotypes which provide more sophisticated guidance for triage.

While primary liver cancer is recognized as among the most deadly malignancies on the planet, approximately 10% of primary hepatobiliary tumors are cholangiocarcinomas. Ninety percent of these originate in the extrahepatic ducts, leaving about 10% as intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas. These relatively rare tumors account for less than 10,000 new cancers in the USA annually and about 3% of gastrointestinal cancers worldwide. The incidence appears to be increasing globally; however, this is associated with an improvement in immunohistochemical diagnosis, with more tumors previously categorized as adenocarcinoma of unknown primary now recognized as being of pancreaticobiliary origin, likely cholangiocarcinoma.

Unlike HCC, most patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma have no known risk factors. Recognized risks include conditions associated with chronic inflammation or infection of the biliary tree, such as sclerosing cholangitis, choledochal cyst, biliary cirrhosis, parasitic infections, and hepatic cirrhosis. However, 90% of patients lack any predisposing condition, so routine surveillance is the exception and diagnosis is often delayed until symptoms develop in advanced stages. Early lymphatic spread, bone metastases, and intrahepatic liver metastases are more common than in HCC. Macrovascular invasion is seen similarly to HCC.

Diagnosis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma can be challenging. Imaging appearance is variable, with three imaging phenotypes described as mass-forming, infiltrative, and intraductal invasion. Tumor vascularity is highly variable, with late enhancement a distinguishing feature from HCC. Thorough diagnostic imaging and endoscopy are necessary to exclude other primaries. Biopsy diagnosis can be difficult due to desmoplastic stroma and poorly differentiated histology. Immunohistochemical stains can suggest a biliary origin, while negative stains help to exclude other tissues of origin such as primary liver or metastasis from pancreas, colon, breast, or lung cancer. Tumor markers can be helpful to distinguish cholangiocarcinoma from HCC. A CA-19-9 level > 100 U/mL (normal up to 37 U/mL) is 68% sensitive and 96% specific for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in patients without sclerosing cholangitis. Less-specific tumor marker elevations include carcinoembryonic antigen, CA-125, and alpha-fetoprotein, with 10% having a mixed hepatocholangiocarcinoma histology.

Type
Chapter
Information
Interventional Oncology
Principles and Practice of Image-Guided Cancer Therapy
, pp. 134 - 138
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Endo, I, Gonen, M, Yopp, AC, et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: rising frequency, improved survival, and determinants of outcome after resection. Ann Surg 2008; 248: 84–96.Google Scholar
2. Shaib, YH, Davila, JA, McGlynn, K, El-Serag, HB. Rising incidence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a true increase? J Hepatol 2004; 40: 472–477.Google Scholar
3. Buc, E, Lesurtel, M, Belghiti, J. Is preoperative histological diagnosis necessary before referral to major surgery for cholangiocarcinoma? HPB (Oxford) 2008; 10: 98–105.Google Scholar
4. Donato, F, Gelatti, U, Tagger, A, et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and hepatitis C and B virus infection, alcohol intake, and hepatolithiasis: a case-control study in Italy. Cancer Causes Control 2001; 12: 959–964.Google Scholar
5. Welzel, TM, Graubard, BI, El-Serag, HB, et al. Risk factors for intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a population-based case-control study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 1221–1228.Google Scholar
6. Chung, YE, Kim, MJ, Park, YN, et al. Varying appearances of cholangiocarcinoma: radiologic–pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2009; 29: 683–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Manfredi, R, Barbaro, B, Masselli, G, Vecchioli, A, Marano, P. Magnetic resonance imaging of cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis 2004; 24: 155–164.Google Scholar
8. Kang, Y, Lee, JM, Kim, SH, Han, JK, Choi, BI. Intrahepatic massforming cholangiocarcinoma: enhancement patterns on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images. Radiology 2012; 264: 751–760.Google Scholar
9. Peporte, AR, Sommer, WH, Nikolaou, K, Reiser, MF, Zech, CJ. Imaging features of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MRI. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82: e101–e106.Google Scholar
10. John, AR, Haghighi, KS, Taniere, P, Esmat, ME, Tan, YM, Bramhall, SR. Is a raised CA19–9 level diagnostic for a cholangiocarcinoma in patients with no history of sclerosing cholangitis? Dis Surg 2006; 23: 319–324.Google Scholar
11. Farges, O, Fuks, D, Treut, YP Le, Azoulay, D, Laurent, A, Bachellier, P, Nuzzo, G, Belghiti, J, Pruvot, FR, Regimbeau, JM. AJCC 7th edition of TNM staging accurately discriminates outcomes of patients with resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: by the AFC-IHCC-2009 study group. Cancer 2011; 117 (10): 2170–2177.Google Scholar
12. Corvera, CU, Blumgart, LH, Akhurst, T, et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography influences management decisions in patients with biliary cancer. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206: 57–65.Google Scholar
13. Petrowsky, H, Wildbrett, P, Husarik, DB, et al. Impact of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography on staging and management of gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol 2006; 45: 43–50.Google Scholar
14. Maithel, SK, Gamblin, TC, Kamel, I, et al. Multidisciplinary approaches to intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Cancer 2013; 119: 3929–3942.Google Scholar
15. Hyder, O, Hatzara, I, Sotiropoulos, GC, et al. Recurrence after operative management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Surgery 2013; 153: 811–818.Google Scholar
16. Sheuermann, U, Kaths, JM, Heise, M, et al. Comparison of resection and transarterial chemoembolisation in the treatment of advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma – a single-center experience. ESJO 2013; 39: 593–600.Google Scholar
17. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Hepatobiliary Cancers. Version 2.2013 6/21/13. www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/hepatobiliary.pdf (accessed April 4, 2016).
18. Eckel, F, Brunner, T, Jelic, S. Biliary cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2011; 22 (Suppl 6): 40–44.Google Scholar
19. Hong, JC, Petrowsky, H, Kaldas, FM, et al. Predictive index for tumor recurrence after liver transplantation for locally advanced intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 2011; 212: 514–520.Google Scholar
20. Kim, JH, Won, HJ, Shin, YM, et al. Radiofrequency ablation for recurrent intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after curative resection. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: 221–225.Google Scholar
21. Xu, HX, Wang, Y, Lu, MD, Liu, LN. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided thermal ablation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Br J Radiol 2012; 85 (1016): 1078–1084.Google Scholar
22. Fu, Y, Yang, W, Wu, W, Yan, K, Xing, BC, Chen, MH. Radiofrequency ablation in the management of recurrent intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Vasc intervent Radiol 2012; 23: 642–649.Google Scholar
23. Zhang, S-J, Hu, P, Wang, N, et al. Thermal ablation versus repeated hepatic resection for recurrent intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20: 3596–3602.Google Scholar
24. Valle, J, Wasan, H, Palmer, DH, et al. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for biliary tract cancer. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1273–1281.Google Scholar
25. Vogl, TJ, Naguid, NNN, Nour-Eldin, NEA, et al. Transarterial chemo-embolization in the treatment of patients with unresectable cholangio-carcinoma: results and prognostic factors governing treatment success. Int J Cancer 2011; 131: 733–740.Google Scholar
26. Kiefer, MV, Albert, M, McNally, M, et al. Chemoembolization of intra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma with cisplatinum, doxorubicin, mitomycin C, Ethiodol, and polyvinyl alcohol: a 2-center study. Cancer 2011; 117: 1498–1505.Google Scholar
27. Ray, CE, Edwards, A, Smith, MT, et al. Metaanalysis of survival, complications and imaging response following chemotherapy-based transarterial therapy in patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 24: 1218–1226.Google Scholar
28. Salem, R, Gilbertson, M, Butt, Z, Memon, K, et al. Increased quality of life among hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with radioembolization compared with chemoembolization. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 1358–1365.Google Scholar
29. Saxena, A, Bester, L, Chua, TC, Chu, FC, Morris, DL. Yttrium-90 radiotherapy for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a preliminary assessment of this novel treatment option. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 484–491.Google Scholar
30. Hoffmann, RT, Paprottka, PM, Schon, A, et al. Transarterial hepatic yttrium-90 radioembolization in patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: factors associated with prolonged survival. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012; 35: 105–116.Google Scholar
31. Rafi, S, Piduru, SM, El-Rayes, B, et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for unresectable standard-chemorefractory intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: survival, efficacy, and safety study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 36: 440–448.Google Scholar
32. Mouli, S, Memon, K, Baker, T, et al. Yttrium-90 radioembolization for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: safety, response, and survival analysis. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 24: 1227–1234.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×