PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 9, 2026Current Problems in Surgery0 citationsOpen Access

Rethinking Early Recurrence in Gallbladder Cancer: Why One Cutoff Does Not Fit All Stages

View Full Paper
YHYaFei HuFLFei LiuWMWenjie Ma

Key Points

  • This research aims to redefine early recurrence in gallbladder cancer by considering stage-specific timing instead of fixed cutoffs.
  • Retrospective cohort analysis of 507 patients with gallbladder carcinoma post-resection
  • Defined early recurrence using stage-specific median time to recurrence
  • Conducted sensitivity analyses including bootstrap assessments and time-varying effects
  • 63.1% of patients experienced recurrence within a median follow-up
  • Stage-dependent median time to recurrence showed significant decreasing trends from stage I to IVA
  • Early recurrence was linked to shorter survival after recurrence in stages IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB, with significant p-values for each stage

Abstract

Early recurrence (ER) after curative-intent resection for gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) is clinically important but lacks a consistent definition. Fixed 6- or 12-month cutoffs are commonly used, however, recurrence timing is strongly stage dependent, which can systematically misclassify ER and compromise cross-study comparability. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing curative-intent resection for GBC with complete recurrence and pathology data. Among recurred patients, ER was defined within each AJCC stage using the prespecified stage-specific median time to recurrence (mTTR) (ER versus LR: TTR≤mTTR vs TTR>mTTR). The primary outcome was survival after recurrence (SAR), evaluated within stage. Sensitivity analyses included bootstrap assessment of stage-specific cut-point stability, RMST contrasts at prespecified horizons, and time-varying effects to address non-proportional hazards. Of 537 screened patients, 507 met eligibility criteria. AJCC stage distribution was I (n=42), IIA (n=55), IIB (n=108), IIIA (n=131), IIIB (n=87), and IVA (n=84). Recurrence occurred in 320/507 (63.1%) patients. In recurred patients, mTTR decreased monotonically with stage (30.4 months in stage I; 14.2, 11.3, 10.4, 7.9, and 6.5 months in stages IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, and IVA), demonstrating fundamentally distinct stage-specific recurrence kinetics. Fixed calendar cutoffs yielded marked stage heterogeneity in the fraction labeled “early”: for TTR≤12 months, 0.0%, 17.4%, 61.8%, 95.1%, 98.6%, and 100.0% across stages I–IVA; for TTR≤6 months, 0.0%, 0.0%, 3.6%, 4.9%, 12.5%, and 34.7%. Under the stage-adapted mTTR definition, ER (vs LR) was associated with significantly shorter SAR in stages IIA (P=0.00519), IIB (P=0.0149), IIIA (P=0.00243), and IIIB (P<0.001), but no in stage I (P=0.208) or IVA (P=0.101). ER (vs LR) was also enriched for adverse pathologic features within stage, most prominently in stage III-IVA disease, including higher perineural invasion (stage IIIA: 52% vs 15%; P<0.001; IIIB: 50% vs 25%; P=0.028; IVA: 90% vs 33%; P<0.001), vascular invasion (IIIA: 52% vs 13%; P<0.001; IIIB: 67% vs 19%; P<0.001; IVA: 95% vs 31%; P<0.001), and tumor necrosis (IIIA: 62% vs 38%; P=0.035; IIIB: 97% vs 36%; P<0.001; IVA: 85% vs 47%; P<0.001). ER in GBC is not a fixed calendar time but a stage-dependent, time-varying phenotype. A stage-adapted ER framework based on within-stage TTR improves interpretability and identifies a high-risk subgroup with shorter SAR and enrichment of adverse pathology. External validation is warranted to confirm transportability across treatment eras and surveillance patterns.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fececcb9154b0b82876026https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpsurg.2026.102055
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper