The prognostic impact of peritoneal washing cytology for otherwise resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients

Clinical Significance of Primary Tumor Resection in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma with Positive Peritoneal Lavage Cytology

BACKGROUND

The prognostic impact of positive peritoneal lavage cytology (CY+) in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) remains unclear. The present study investigated the clinical significance of primary tumor resection of CY+ PHC.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 282 patients who underwent surgery for PHC between September 2002 and March 2022. The patients' clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were compared between the CY negative (CY-) resected (n = 262), CY+ resected (n = 12), and CY+ unresected (n = 8) groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for overall survival.

RESULTS

The expected residual liver volume was significantly higher in the CY+ resected group (61%) than in the CY- resected (47%) and CY+ unresected (37%) groups (p = 0.004 and 0.007, respectively). The CY+ resected group had a higher administration rate of postoperative therapy than the CY- resected group (58% vs. 16%, p = 0.002). Overall survival of the CY+ resected group was similar to that of the CY- resected group (median survival time [MST] 44.5 vs. 44.6, p = 0.404) and was significantly better than that of the CY+ unresected group (MST 44.5 vs. 17.1, p = 0.006). CY positivity was not a prognostic factor according to a multivariate analysis in patients with primary tumor resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The CY+ resected group showed better survival than the CY+ unresected group and a similar survival to that of the CY- resected group. Resection of the primary tumor with CY+ PHC may improve the prognosis in selected patients.

Clinical efficacy of adjuvant treatments for patients with resected biliary tract cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the benefits of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected biliary tract cancer (BTC) and identify the optimal adjuvant treatment scheme.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Studies comparing different adjuvant therapies in patients with BTC were searched in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to December 2021. Additionally, the references were manually searched for the related literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible studies were identified, and data were extracted independently by two authors. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed using R software. The pooled outcomes of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were measured using the combined HRs with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Nineteen eligible studies reporting three types of adjuvant therapies were included in our network meta-analysis. Adjuvant radiotherapy (ART, HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.93), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ACRT; HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83) and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98) were more effective in prolonging OS than that of observation, with no significant difference between the three adjuvant therapies. Moreover, the improvement in DFS was also found in ACRT and ACT compared with that of observation (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.75; HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.97, respectively). Furthermore, ACRT obtained a slightly better DFS benefit compared with that of ACT (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Our primary results demonstrated that, compared with that of observation, ACRT and ACT after radical resection could provide better OS and DFS benefits in patients with BTC. However, ART only showed improvement in OS, but not in DFS. Due to the lack of head-to-head studies of ACT, ACRT and ART, the above results need to be further verified by prospective randomised controlled trials.