Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract carcinomas.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Abdel-Rahman O
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6494548 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The estimation of mortality risk among patients diagnosed with advanced cancer provides important information for clinicians and patients in clinical practice. Currently, gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens are the standard treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). We aimed to develop a nomogram to predict the 6-month mortality rate among patients with advanced BTC to help physicians evaluate treatment options and outcomes. We conducted a retrospective analysis to evaluate the 6-month mortality rate among patients with advanced BTC who underwent gemcitabine-based chemotherapy from 2012 to 2018. Data regarding pretreatment factors and the clinical response to treatment were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify independent factors for nomogram creation. A total of 202 advanced BTC patients who were treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were included in this analysis. No difference in survival was identified between patients undergoing gemcitabine monotherapy and those treated with gemcitabine combined with other cytotoxic agents. The univariate analysis revealed 10 significant factors, while the multivariate analysis identified four independent factors, including gender, monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and liver metastasis, which were used to establish the nomogram. The performance of this nomogram for the prediction of 6-month mortality risk was found to be promising and feasible based on logistic regression. A nomogram based on four independent pretreatment factors, including gender, MLR, ALP, and liver metastasis, was established to predict the 6-month mortality risk in patients with advanced BTC; it can provide clinicians and patients with additional information when evaluating treatment outcomes.
| S-EPMC8268608 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cisplatin/gemcitabine association has been a standard of care for first-line regimen in advanced biliary tract cancer nevertheless oxaliplatin/gemcitabine regimen is frequently preferred. Because comparative effectiveness in clinical outcomes of cisplatin- versus oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is not available, a systematic review of studies assessing cisplatin/gemcitabine or oxaliplatin/gemcitabine chemotherapies in advanced biliary tract cancer was performed. Published studies evaluating cisplatin/gemcitabine or oxaliplatin/gemcitabine in advanced biliary tract cancer were included. Each study was weighted according to the number of patients included. The primary objective was to assess weighted median of medians overall survival (mOS) reported for both regimens. Secondary goals were to assess weighted median of medians progression-free survival (mPFS) and toxic effects were pooled and compared within each arm. Thirty-three studies involving 1470 patients were analyzed. In total, 771 and 699 patients were treated by cisplatin/gemcitabine and oxaliplatin/gemcitabine, respectively. Weighted median of mOS was 9.7 months in cisplatin group and 9.5 months in oxaliplatin group. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy was significantly associated with more grade 3 and 4 asthenia, diarrhea, liver toxicity, and hematological toxicity. Sensitivity analysis including only the studies with the standard regimen of cisplatin (25-35 mg/m(2) administered on days 1 and 8) showed that the weighted median of mOS increased from 9.7 to 11.7 months but Gem/CDDP regimen remained more toxic than Gemox regimen. These results suggest that the Gem/CDDP regimen with cisplatin (25-35 mg/m(2)) administered on days 1 and 8 is associated with survival advantage than Gemox regimen but with addition of toxicity.
| S-EPMC4298376 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Only recently has a standard chemotherapy regimen, gemcitabine plus cisplatin, been established for advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs) based on a phase III randomized study. The aim of this phase II single-institution trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine combined with carboplatin in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced BTCs.Patients with histologically proven BTCs, including cholangiocarcinoma or gallbladder and ampullary carcinomas, were treated with a maximum of nine cycles of intravenous (i.v.) gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2) over 30 min on days 1 and 8 with i.v. carboplatin dosed at an area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 5 over 60 min on day 1 of a 21-day cycle.A total of 48 patients with advanced BTCs (35 cholangiocarcinoma, 12 gallbladder and 1 ampullary cancer) were enrolled. A median of four cycles were administered (range: 1-9). The overall response rate for evaluable patients was 31.1%. Median progression-free survival, overall survival and 6-month survival rates are 7.8 months, 10.6 months and 85.4%, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities include neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Grade 3 or 4 non-haematological toxicities were rare.Gemcitabine combined with carboplatin has activity against advanced BTCs. Our results are comparable to other gemcitabine-platinum or gemcitabine-fluoropyrimidine combinations in advanced BTCs.
| S-EPMC3028583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A 68-year-old woman was referred to our hospital with increased levels of biliary enzymes. On imaging, the patient was diagnosed with unresectable intrahepatic biliary tract cancer (BTC) with invasion of the portal vein and para-aortic lymph node metastasis (cT3N1M1, cStage IVb) and underwent endoscopic biliary drainage for the biliary stricture prior to therapy. The patient was subsequently enrolled in a phase III randomized trial (UMIN000014371/NCT02182778) and randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine/cisplatin/S-1 (GCS) combination therapy intravenously at doses of 1,000 or 25 mg/m2 on day 1 and orally twice daily at a dose of 80 mg/m2 on days 1-7 every 2 weeks. After 12 cycles of scheduled therapy without uncontrollable adverse effects, the patient achieved a good partial response with chemotherapy. Computed tomography (CT) revealed a marked reduction of the primary and metastatic lesions. In addition,18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/CT revealed diminishing abnormal uptake and no macroscopic evidence of factors adversely affecting tumor resectability. Therefore, the patient underwent extended right hepatic lobectomy, lymph node dissection and left hepaticojejunostomy. Finally, histological examination of the resected tissues revealed no residual cancer cells, suggesting a pathologically complete response. We herein present the case of a patient with intrahepatic BTC who achieved a pathologically complete response following combination chemotherapy with GCS.
| S-EPMC5228213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract carcinomas (BTCs) have poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Therefore, it is crucial to combine standard therapies with molecular targeting. In this study EGFR, HER2, and their molecular transducers were analysed in terms of mutations, amplifications and over-expression in a BTC case series. Furthermore, we tested the efficacy of drugs targeting these molecules, as single agents or in combination with gemcitabine, the standard therapeutic agent against BTC. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry, FISH and mutational analysis were performed on 49 BTC samples of intrahepatic (ICCs), extrahepatic (ECCs), and gallbladder (GBCs) origin. The effect on cell proliferation of different EGFR/HER2 pathway inhibitors as single agents or in combination with gemcitabine was investigated on BTC cell lines. Western blot analyses were performed to investigate molecular mechanisms of targeted drugs. RESULTS: EGFR is expressed in 100% of ICCs, 52.6% of ECCs, and in 38.5% of GBCs. P-MAPK and p-Akt are highly expressed in ICCs (>58% of samples), and to a lower extent in ECCs and GBCs (<46%), indicating EGFR pathway activation. HER2 is overexpressed in 10% of GBCs (with genomic amplification), and 26.3% of ECCs (half of which has genomic amplification). EGFR or its signal transducers are mutated in 26.5% of cases: 4 samples bear mutations of PI3K (8.2%), 3 cases (6.1%) in K-RAS, 4 (8.2%) in B-RAF, and 2 cases (4.1%) in PTEN, but no loss of PTEN expression is detected. EGI-1 cell line is highly sensitive to gemcitabine, TFK1 and TGBC1-TKB cell lines are responsive and HuH28 cell line is resistant. In EGI-1 cells, combination with gefitinib further increases the antiproliferative effect of gemcitabine. In TFK1 and TGBC1-TKB cells, the efficacy of gemcitabine is increased with addiction of sorafenib and everolimus. In TGBC1-TKB cells, lapatinib also has a synergic effect with gemcitabine. HuH28 becomes responsive if treated in combination with erlotinib. Moreover, HuH28 cells are sensitive to lapatinib as a single agent. Molecular mechanisms were confirmed by western blot analysis. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that EGFR and HER2 pathways are suitable therapeutic targets for BTCs. The combination of gemcitabine with drugs targeting these pathways gives encouraging results and further clinical studies could be warranted.
| S-EPMC3000850 | biostudies-other
Project description:Chemotherapy is indispensable for the treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer. Recently, reports regarding first-line chemotherapy have increased, and first-line chemotherapy treatment has become gradually more sophisticated. Gemcitabine and cisplatin combination therapy (or gemcitabine and oxaliplatin combination therapy) have become the standard of care for advanced biliary tract cancer. Oral fluoropyrimidines have also been shown to have good antitumor effects. Gemcitabine, platinum compounds, and oral fluoropyrimidines are now considered key drugs for the treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer. Several clinical trials using molecular targeted agents are also ongoing. Combination therapy using cytotoxic agents and molecular-targeted agents has been evaluated widely. However, reports regarding second-line chemotherapy remain limited, and it has not yet been clarified whether second-line chemotherapy can improve the prognosis of advanced biliary tract cancer. Thus, there is an urgent need to establish second-line standard chemotherapy treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer. Several problems exist when assessing the results of previous reports concerning advanced biliary tract cancer. In the present review, the current status of the treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer is summarized, and several associated problems are indicated. These problems should be solved to achieve more sophisticated treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer.
| S-EPMC3759755 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We posed six clinical questions (CQ) on preoperative biliary drainage and organized all pertinent evidence regarding these questions. CQ 1. Is preoperative biliary drainage necessary for patients with jaundice? The indications for preoperative drainage for jaundiced patients are changing greatly. Many reports state that, excluding conditions such as cholangitis and liver dysfunction, biliary drainage is not necessary before pancreatoduodenectomy or less invasive surgery. However, the morbidity and mortality of extended hepatectomy for biliary cancer is still high, and the most common cause of death is hepatic failure; therefore, preoperative biliary drainage is desirable in patients who are to undergo extended hepatectomy. CQ 2. What procedures are appropriate for preoperative biliary drainage? There are three methods of biliary drainage: percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD), and surgical drainage. ERBD is an internal drainage method, and PTBD and ENBD are external methods. However, there are no reports of comparisons of preoperative biliary drainage methods using randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, at this point, a method should be used that can be safely performed with the equipment and techniques available at each facility. CQ 3. Which is better, unilateral or bilateral biliary drainage, in malignant hilar obstruction? Unilateral biliary drainage of the future remnant hepatic lobe is usually enough even when intrahepatic bile ducts are separated into multiple units due to hilar malignancy. Bilateral biliary drainage should be considered in the following cases: those in which the operative procedure is difficult to determine before biliary drainage; those in which cholangitis has developed after unilateral drainage; and those in which the decrease in serum bilirubin after unilateral drainage is very slow. CQ 4. What is the best treatment for post-drainage fever? The most likely cause of high fever in patients with biliary drainage is cholangitis due to problems with the existing drainage catheter or segmental cholangitis if an undrained segment is left. In the latter case, urgent drainage is required. CQ 5. Is bile culture necessary in patients with biliary drainage who are to undergo surgery? Monitoring of bile cultures is necessary for patients with biliary drainage to determine the appropriate use of antibiotics during the perioperative period. CQ 6. Is bile replacement useful for patients with external biliary drainage? Maintenance of the enterohepatic bile circulation is vitally important. Thus, preoperative bile replacement in patients with external biliary drainage is very likely to be effective when highly invasive surgery (e.g., extended hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma) is planned.
| S-EPMC2794354 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Gemcitabine with capecitabine (gem-cap) is an established regimen for advanced biliary cancer (ABC) supported by our previously reported phase II trial. Here, we provide our updated experience. METHODS:Single institution, retrospective study from 2005 to 2015 of ABC treated with gem-cap. RESULTS:A total of 372 patients with ABC were identified, of whom 227 (61.0%) were treated with chemotherapy. 153 patients (67.4%) received gem-cap, of which 129 (56.8%) received it in the first line. Thirty two point six percent (42/129) were locally advanced, 67.4% (87/129) had metastatic disease, and 18.6% (24/129) received it as adjuvant therapy. Disease sites included 48.8% [63] intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC), 24.0% [31] extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) and 27.1% [35] gallbladder carcinoma (GBC). Median follow-up was 49.7 months (mo). The median PFS and OS were 8.0 mo [95% confidence intervals (CI): 6.0-9.3] and 13.0 mo (95% CI: 10.7-17.4), respectively. Overall, 53.5% (69/129) experienced a grade 3/4 toxicity. The most common (35.7%) was a hematologic toxicity (neutropenia or thrombocytopenia) followed by infection (25.6%). CONCLUSIONS:Gem-cap provides similar survival outcomes to gemcitabine/cisplatin based on historical comparison to the ABC-2 trial (median PFS =8.0 mo and OS =11.7 mo). Gem-cap may offer the advantage of fewer adverse events compared to the levels reported in ABC-2 (grade 3/4 events 70.7%).
| S-EPMC5582046 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer; expression of VEGF and its receptors is associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of the addition of cediranib (an oral inhibitor of VEGF receptor 1, 2, and 3) to cisplatin and gemcitabine on progression-free survival.MethodsIn this multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 study, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed or cytologically confirmed advanced biliary tract cancer from hepatobiliary oncology referral centres in the UK. Patients were eligible if they had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 and an estimated life expectancy of longer than 3 months. Patients were given first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy (25 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine [on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, for up to eight cycles]) with either 20 mg oral cediranib or placebo once a day until disease progression. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) with a minimisation algorithm, incorporating the stratification factors: extent of disease, primary disease site, previous treatment, ECOG performance status, and centre. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00939848, and was closed on Sept 30, 2014; results of the final analysis for the primary endpoint are presented.FindingsBetween April 5, 2011, and Sept 28, 2012, we enrolled 124 patients (62 in each group). With a median follow-up of 12·2 months (IQR 7·3-18·5), median progression-free survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·5-9·3) in the cediranib group and 7·4 months (5·7-8·5) in the placebo group (HR 0·93, 80% CI 0·74-1·19, 95% CI 0·65-1·35; p=0·72). Patients who received cediranib had more grade 3-4 toxic effects than did patients who received placebo: hypertension (23 [37%] vs 13 [21%]; p=0·05), diarrhoea (eight [13%] vs two [3%]; p=0·05); platelet count decreased (ten [16%] vs four [6%]; p=0·09), white blood cell decreased (15 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·06) and fatigue (16 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·04).InterpretationCediranib did not improve the progression-free survival of patients with advanced biliary tract cancer in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, which remains the standard of care. Although patients in the cediranib group had more adverse events, we recorded no unexpected toxic effects. The role of VEGF inhibition in addition to chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer remains investigational.FundingCancer Research UK and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals.
| S-EPMC4648082 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of second-line chemotherapy (CT) is not established in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC). We investigated the outcome of aBTC patients treated with second-line CT and devised a prognostic model.MethodsBaseline clinical and laboratory data of 300 consecutive aBTC patients were collected and association with overall survival (OS) was investigated by multivariable Cox models.ResultsThe following parameters resulted independently associated with longer OS: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 (P<0.001; hazard ratio (HR), 0.348; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.215-0.562), CA19.9 lower than median (P=0.013; HR, 0.574; 95% CI 0.370-0.891), progression-free survival after first-line CT ? 6 months (P=0.027; HR, 0.633; 95% CI 0.422-0.949) and previous surgery on primary tumour (P=0.027; HR, 0.609; 95% CI 0.392-0.945). We grouped the 249 patients with complete data available into three categories according to the number of fulfilled risk factors: median OS times for good-risk (zero to one factors), intermediate-risk (two factors) and poor-risk (three to four factors) groups were 13.1, 6.6 and 3.7 months, respectively (P<0.001).ConclusionsEasily available clinical and laboratory factors predict prognosis of aBTC patients undergoing second-line CT. This model allows individual patient-risk stratification and may help in treatment decision and trial design.
| S-EPMC4007244 | biostudies-literature