Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), a tumor of the bile duct epithelium, is increasing in incidence. CCA remains a highly fatal malignancy because early diagnosis is difficult. Based on its anatomical location, CCA can be categorized into the following three groups: perihilar, intrahepatic, and extrahepatic. Patients with CCA complain of asymptomatic jaundice, weight loss, and right upper quadrant abdominal discomfort. Imaging modalities, including transabdominal ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, play an important role in detecting tumors as well as guiding biopsy procedures and staging workups in CCA. Characteristically, extrahepatic CCA shows abrupt changes in ductal diameter with upstream ductal dilation. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are recommended as the next step in the evaluation of extrahepatic CCA. Tissue is obtained through EUS-FNA or ERCP (biopsy, brush cytology), and therapeutic intervention (such as stent insertion) is performed with ERCP. Moreover, several serum tumor markers (carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen) can be useful in diagnosing CCA in some patients.

Although liquid biopsy of blood is useful for cancer diagnosis and prediction of prognosis, diagnostic and prognostic value of ctDNA in bile fluid for BTCs are not clear yet. To determine whether liquid biopsy for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can replace tissue biopsy when assessing somatic mutations in biliary tract cancers (BTCs). Bile samples were obtained from 42 patients with BTC. Matched formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples were obtained from 20 of these patients and matched plasma samples from 16 of them. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) was used for detection KRAS somatic mutation. KRAS mutations were identified in the bile ctDNA of 20 of 42 (48%) patients. Patients with mutant KRAS showed significantly worse survival than those with wild-type KRAS (2-year survival rates: 0% vs. 55.5%, respectively; p = 0.018). There was 80.0% mutational concordance between the paired bile ctDNA and FFPE samples, and 42.9% between the plasma and FFPE samples. On transcriptomic sequencing of one set of paired bile and FFPE samples, expression level of KRAS-associated signaling oncogenes in the bile and tissue samples showed a strong positive correlation (r = 0.991, p < 0.001). Liquid biopsy of bile reliably detect mutational variants within the bile ctDNA of BTC patients. These results suggest that bile is an effective biopsy fluid for ctDNA analysis.

Although FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) has been proven efficacious in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC), physicians hesitate to administer it due to its hematologic toxicities. We investigated the usefulness of primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. We reviewed electronic medical records of MPC patients with good performance status who were administered FOLFIRINOX as the first-line treatment from 2011 to 2017. The patients were divided into primary G-CSF prophylaxis users (group A) and non-users or therapeutic/secondary users (group B). Cumulative relative dose (cRDI), adverse effects (AEs), and overall survival (OS) were compared. A total of 165 patients (group A (57) vs. group B (108)) were investigated. Intergroup differences in baseline characteristics were not significant, although the cRDI and the number of treatment cycles were both higher in group A than in group B (cRDI: 80.6% vs. 73.9%, p = 0.007; 9 vs. 6 cycles, p = 0.004). Primary G-CSF prophylaxis reduced the risk of neutropenia (55.6% to 31.6%, p = 0.003) and febrile neutropenia (18.5% to 1.8%, p = 0.002) and improved OS (8.8 to 14.7 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.766, 95% CI: 1.257–2.481, p = 0.001). When administering FOLFIRINOX for MPC, primary G-CSF prophylaxis could be rationalized to reduced AEs and improve survival; more prospective studies are needed.

Background: Intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct (IPNB) is a precancerous lesion of cholangiocarcinoma, for which surgical resection is the most effective treatment. We evaluated the predictors of malignancy in IPNB according to anatomical location and the prognosis without surgery. Methods: A total of 196 IPNB patients who underwent pathologic confirmation by surgical resection or endoscopic retrograde cholangiography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic biopsy were included. Clinicopathological findings of IPNB with invasive carcinoma or mucosal dysplasia were analyzed according to anatomical location. Results: Of the 116 patients with intrahepatic IPNB (I-IPNB) and 80 patients with extrahepatic IPNB (E-IPNB), 62 (53.4%) and 61 (76.3%) were diagnosed with invasive carcinoma, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that mural nodule > 12 mm (p = 0.043) in I-IPNB and enhancement of mural nodule (p = 0.044) in E-IPNB were predictive factors for malignancy. For pathologic discrepancy before and after surgery, IPNB has a 71.2% sensitivity and 82.3% specificity. In the non-surgical IPNB group, composed of nine I-IPNB and seven E-IPNB patients, 43.7% progressed to IPNB with invasive carcinoma within 876 days. Conclusions: E-IPNB has a higher rate of malignancy than I-IPNB. The predictive factor for malignancy is mural nodule > 12 mm in I-IPNB and mural nodule enhancement in E-IPNB.

It is important to make a differential diagnosis between inflammatory diseases of the bowel with similar clinical and endoscopic features. The profiling of immune cells could be helpful for accurately diagnosing inflammatory bowel diseases. We compared immune marker expression between Crohn’s disease (CD), intestinal Behcet’s disease (BD), and intestinal tuberculosis (TB) and evaluated the usefulness of immune profiling in differentiating between these diseases. Biopsy specimens were acquired around ulcerations on the terminal ileum or cecum from five patients with each disease. Panel 1 included multiplex immunohistochemistry staining for CD8, CD4, Foxp3, CD20, programmed death-1, and granzyme B. CD56, CD68, CD163, CD11c, and HLA-DR were analyzed in panel 2. The differences in cytotoxic T cells (CD8⁺CD4⁻Fopx3⁻CD20⁻), helper T cells (CD8⁻CD4⁺Fopx3⁻CD20⁻), and regulatory T cells (CD8⁻CD4⁺Fopx3⁺CD20⁻) were also not significant. However, M1 macrophage (CD68⁺CD163⁻HLA⁻DR⁻) cell densities were significantly higher in intestinal BD than in other diseases. The expression level of dendritic cells (CD56⁻CD68⁻CD163⁻CD11c⁺HLA-DR⁺) was highest in intestinal TB and lowest in intestinal BD. The expression of immune cells, including M1 macrophages and dendritic cells, was different between CD, intestinal BD, and intestinal TB. Immune profiling can be helpful for establishing differential diagnoses of inflammatory bowel diseases.