Survival improvement and prognostic factors in recent management of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A single-center study

A Systematised Literature Review of Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Unresectable Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer

BACKGROUND

Biliary tract cancers are rare aggressive malignancies typically diagnosed when the disease is metastatic or unresectable, precluding curative treatment.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify treatment guidelines, real-world treatment patterns, and outcomes for unresectable advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancers in adult patients.

METHODS

Databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were systematically searched between 1 January, 2000 and 25 November, 2021, and supplemented by hand searches. Eligible records were (1) treatment guidelines and (2) observational studies reporting real-world treatment outcomes, for unresectable advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancers. Only studies performed in the UK, Germany, France, Australia, Canada and South Korea were extracted, to moderate the number of records for synthesis while maintaining representation of a wide range of biliary tract cancer incidences.

RESULTS

A total of 66 relevant unique full-text records were extracted, including 16 treatment guidelines and 50 observational studies. Among guidelines, chemotherapies were most strongly recommended at first line (1L); the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GEMCIS) was recommended as the standard of care in 1L. Recommendations for systemic chemotherapy in the second line (2L) conflicted because of uncertainties around survival benefit. Guidelines on further lines of treatment included a range of locoregional modalities and stenting or best supportive care without providing clear recommendations because of data paucity. Fifty observational studies reporting real-world treatment outcomes were extracted, of which 25 (50%) and 9 (18%) reported outcomes in 1L and 2L, respectively; 22 (44%) reported outcomes for treatments described as 'palliative'. In 1L, outcomes for systemic chemotherapy were most frequently described (23/25 studies), and GEMCIS was the most common systemic chemotherapy used (10/23 studies) in line with guidelines. Median overall survival with 1L systemic chemotherapy was < 12 months in most studies (16/23; range 4.7-22.3 months). Most 2L studies (10/11) described outcomes for systemic chemotherapy, most commonly for fluoropyrimidine-based regimen (5/10 studies). Median overall survival with 2L systemic chemotherapy was < 12 months in 5/10 studies (range 4.9-21.5 months). Median progression-free survival was reported more rarely than median overall survival. Some studies with small sample sizes or specifically selected patient populations (e.g. higher performance status, or patients who had already responded to treatment) achieved higher median overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

At the time of this review, treatment options for unresectable advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancers confer poor real-world survival. For over a decade, GEMCIS remained the 1L standard of care, highlighting the lack of therapeutic innovation in this indication and the urgent unmet need for novel treatments with improved outcomes in this aggressive condition. Additional observational studies are needed to further understand the effectiveness of currently available treatments, as well as newly available therapies including the addition of immunotherapy in the evolving treatment landscape.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal bile duct cancer: an inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) has been extended to periampullary cancers, but the oncologic outcome of MIPD for distal bile duct cancer (DBDC) has not been confirmed yet.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for DBDC of stage I-IIb from 2015 to 2019 at a tertiary referral center were identified and divided into open PD (OPD) and MIPD groups, the latter including laparoscopic and robotic procedures. Survival was compared between the two groups after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using predetermined factors, and exploratory mediation analysis was performed using surgery-derived outcomes.

RESULTS

MIPD (n = 81) group had more female patients (46.9% vs 31.6%, p = 0.011) and longer operation time (366.2 min vs. 279.1 min, p < 0.001) than the OPD (n = 288) group before IPTW. Otherwise, intraoperative and immediate postoperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups. In oncologic outcomes, MIPD group showed comparable 3-year overall survival (78.2% vs 75.0%, p = 0.062) and recurrence-free survival (51.2% vs 53.4%, p = 0.871) rates with OPD group before IPTW, and MIPD was not related with survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.26, p = 0.18) and recurrence (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.67-1.53, p = 0.949) after IPTW with consideration of potential mediators. Sensitivity analysis using propensity score matching also showed similar results for survival (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.32-1.44, p = 0.312) and recurrence (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.67-1.88, p = 0.653).

CONCLUSION

MIPD and OPD groups showed similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes. MIPD could be a considerable treatment option without oncological compromise in high-volume centers.

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for extrahepatic bile duct adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to establish a prognostic nomogram for patients with extrahepatic bile duct adenocarcinoma (EBDA).

METHODS

From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, we retrieved clinical data from 1,485 patients diagnosed with EBDA between 2004 and 2015. These patients were randomly assigned to either the training or validation group in a ratio of 2:1. Cox proportional risk regression models were used to analyze the association of each variable with overall survival (OS). Univariate and multifactorial Cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors, and prognostic nomograms were created on the basis of the results of Cox multifactorial regression analysis. Performance was assessed by calibration curves and ROC curves. Internal validation was performed using the validation cohort. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to perform log-rank constructions for different risk groups.

RESULTS

The results indicated that age, race, N and M stages of tumor-lymph node metastases based on AJCC version 6, surgery, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for OS in patients with EBDA. The constructed nomograms showed decent classification in predicting both 3- and 5-year survival rates. The calibration curves also show a high degree of agreement between the predicted and actual operating systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The nomogram that we constructed provides a relatively accurate and applicable prediction of survival outcome in patients with EBDA, which helps to provide reference and guidance for patient treatment.