Table 3. Studies investigating the prognostic significance of mIDH1 in patients with ICC.
| Reference | Patients with ICC, N | Follow-up, months | Patients with mIDH1 and ICC, n (%) | Prognostic significance of mIDH1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Churi et al. 2014 (13)a | 55 | Median, 19 | 10 (18.0) | Not associated with PFS or OS (not mentioned for mIDH2) |
| Javle et al. 2016 (9)a | 224 | NR | 40 (17.9) | Not prognostic for OS |
| Lowery et al. 2016 (53)a,b | 30 | NR | 9 (30.0) | Not associated with TTP in response to first line of chemotherapy in advanced disease (77% gemcitabine/platinum) |
| Pak et al. 2017 (56)a,b | 66 | NR | 15 (22.7) | Not prognostic for OS or DFS |
| Pawlik et al. 2014 (58)b | 138 | NR | 11 (7.8) | Not associated with survival |
| Ruzzenente et al. 2016 (17)a | 53 | Mean, 28.3±25.8 | 7 (13.2) | Not associated with OS |
| Wang et al. 2013 (65)a | 326 | Chinese cohort: median, 11.00 (range, 1–110.13); USA cohort: median, 29.5 (range, 0.67–153.43) |
23 (7.1) | mIDH2 but not mIDH1 associated with longer time to tumor recurrence after resection (P=0.021) |
| Zhu et al. 2014 (69)a | 200 | Median, 23.2 | 31 (15.5) | Not associated with OS |
a, studies with overall survival; b, conference abstract. mIDH1/2, isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2; ICC, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; NR, not reported; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; TTP, time to progression; DFS, disease-free survival.