Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Hepatol. Oct 27, 2020; 12(10): 693-708
Published online Oct 27, 2020. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693
Published online Oct 27, 2020. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693
Ref. | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Conversion to resection | Tumor response |
Ibrahim et al[68], 2008 | Prospective | Y-90 | 24 | 1 (4%) | 6PR, 15 SD, 1PD |
Mouli et al[69], 2013 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 46 | 5 (11%) | 11 PR, 33 SD, 1 PD |
Rayar et al[71], 2015 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine followed by Y-90 | 10 | 8 (80%) | NR |
Saxena et al[72], 2010 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 25 | 1 (4%) | 6 PR, 11 SD, 5 PD |
Rafi et al[73], 2012 | Prospective | Y-90 | 19 | NR | 2 PR, 13 SD, 4 PD |
Hoffman et al[74], 2012 | Prospective | Y-90 | 33 | NR | 12 PR, 17 SD, 5 PD |
Riby et al[75], 2020 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 19 | 19 (100%) | NR |
Edeline et al[76], 2019 | Phase II Trial | GemCis + Y-90 | 26 | 9 (22%) | NR |
- Citation: Akateh C, Ejaz AM, Pawlik TM, Cloyd JM. Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. World J Hepatol 2020; 12(10): 693-708
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v12/i10/693.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693