A phase II FOLFOX-4 regimen as second-line treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer refractory to gemcitabine/cisplatin

The Recent Trends of Systemic Treatments and Locoregional Therapies for Cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a hepatic malignancy that has a rapidly increasing incidence. CCA is anatomically classified into intrahepatic (iCCA) and extrahepatic (eCCA), which is further divided into perihilar (pCCA) and distal (dCCA) subtypes, with higher incidence rates in Asia. Despite its rarity, CCA has a low 5-year survival rate and remains the leading cause of primary liver tumor-related death over the past 10-20 years. The systemic therapy section discusses gemcitabine-based regimens as primary treatments, along with oxaliplatin-based options. Second-line therapy is limited but may include short-term infusional fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin (LV) and oxaliplatin. The adjuvant therapy section discusses approaches to improve overall survival (OS) post-surgery. However, only a minority of CCA patients qualify for surgical resection. In comparison to adjuvant therapies, neoadjuvant therapy for unresectable cases shows promise. Gemcitabine and cisplatin indicate potential benefits for patients awaiting liver transplantation. The addition of immunotherapies to chemotherapy in combination is discussed. Nivolumab and innovative approaches like CAR-T cells, TRBAs, and oncolytic viruses are explored. We aim in this review to provide a comprehensive report on the systemic and locoregional therapies for CCA.

Potential efficacy of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy using gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) has a poor prognosis, as the resectability rate is low due to its diagnosis at a late/advanced stage. Moreover, most patients with resected ICC eventually relapse. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been indicated only by a few reports to be effective in patients with advanced ICC; thus, its efficacy for these patients remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of HAIC using gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced ICC. A total of 18 patients who underwent HAIC were retrospectively investigated. The patients received gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil through one artery. In patients who received gemcitabine plus cisplatin (n = 10), the response and disease control rates were 0% and 80.0%, respectively; the median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after treatment initiation were 6.3 and 3.7 months, respectively. In patients who never received chemotherapy (n = 8), the response and disease control rates were 37.5% and 75%, respectively; the median OS and PFS were 20.6 and 8.1 months, respectively. Moreover, we compared the patients who received HAIC using gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil to patients whose tumors were refractory to systemic gemcitabine and cisplatin therapy. The OS of the patients who received HAIC was better than that of the patients who received standard chemotherapy cohort since the gemcitabine plus cisplatin combination therapy-refractory response and disease onset (P = 0.045, 0.006). HAIC using gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil may be effective as a therapeutic option for patients with advanced ICC.

Second-line treatments in advanced biliary tract cancer: systematic literature review of efficacy, effectiveness and safety

Background: A systematic review was conducted to understand clinical, economic and health-related quality-of-life outcomes in second-line biliary tract cancer. Materials & methods: The review followed established recommendations. The feasibility of network meta-analysis revealed limited networks, thus synthesis was limited to a summary of reported ranges, percentiles and medians. Results: The review included 62 trials and observational studies highly variable with respect to key baseline characteristics. Commonly evaluated second-line treatments included fluoropyrimidine-, gemcitabine- and S-1-based regimens. Across active treatment arms, median overall survival ranged from 3.5 to 15.0 months (median: 6.9), median progression-free survival from 1.4 to 6.5 months (median: 2.9) and objective response from 0 to 36.4%. Outcomes were similar between study types, with a few notable outliers. Treatment-related/-emergent adverse events were infrequently reported; no studies reported economic or health-related quality-of-life outcomes. Conclusions: Biliary tract cancer is a difficult-to-treat disease with poor prognosis. Despite evolving treatment landscapes, more recent studies did not show clinical outcome improvement, highlighting an unmet need among advanced/metastatic patients.

Cholangiocarcinoma Therapeutics: An Update

BACKGROUND

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most common hepatobiliary cancer and associated with a poor prognosis. Only one-third of CCA cases are diagnosed at operable stages. However, a high rate of relapse has been observed postoperatively. Besides screening for operable individuals, efficacious therapeutic for recurrent and advanced CCA is urgently needed. The treatment outcome of available therapeutics is important to clarify clinical indication and facilitate the development of treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to compare the treatment outcome of different therapeutics based on both overall survival and progression-free survival.

METHODS

Over one hundred peer-reviewed articles were examined. We compared the treatment outcome between different treatment methods, including tumor resection with or without postoperative systematic therapy, chemotherapies including FOFLOX, and targeted therapies, such as IDH1, K-RAS, and FGFR inhibitors. Notably, the scientific basis and outcome of available treatment methods were compared with the standard first-line therapy.

RESULTS

CCAs at early stages should firstly undergo tumor resection surgery, followed by postoperative treatment with Capecitabine. Chemotherapy can be considered as a preoperative option for unresectable CCAs. Inoperable CCAs with genetic aberrances like FGFR alterations, IDH1, and KRAS mutations should be considered with targeted therapies. Fluoropyrimidine prodrug (S-1)/Gemcitabine/Cisplatin and nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine/Cisplatin show favorable outcome which hints at the triplet regimen to be superior to Gemcitabine/Cisplatin on CCA. The triplet chemotherapeutic should be tested further compared to Gemcitabine/Cisplatin among CCAs without genetic alterations. Gemcitabine plus S-1 was recently suggested as the convenient and equivalent standard first-line for advanced/recurrent biliary tract cancer.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a comparative outcome between novel targeted therapies and currently available therapeutics.

A single-arm, multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial of surufatinib in patients with unresectable or metastatic biliary tract cancer

BACKGROUND

Several clinical studies of vascular endothelial growth factor/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF/VEGFR) therapy as a second-line treatment for biliary tract cancer (BTC) have shown modest efficacy. In this study, surufatinib was evaluated as a second-line VEGFR therapy in patients with BTC.

METHODS

This was a single-arm, multicenter, open-label phase 2 study conducted in China. The study enrolled eligible patients with BTC, who had received surufatinib monotherapy as second-line treatment, at a dose of 300 mg, once daily, in 28-day cycles. Tumor assessments were performed every 8 weeks (±7 days) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.

RESULTS

As of November 30, 2018, 39 patients with BTC, including 29 (74.4%) with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 5 (12.8%) with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 5 (12.8%) with gallbladder cancer, were enrolled and treated with surufatinib. The 16-week progression-free survival rate was 46.33% (95% CI, 24.38-65.73), with median progression-free survival of 3.7 months and median overall survival of 6.9 months. In addition, results from subgroup and post hoc analyses revealed that patients with the proper tumor locations or appropriate levels of serum biomarkers might receive greater clinical benefits. The top 3 treatment-related adverse events with severity of grade ≥3 included blood bilirubin increased (20.5%), hypertension (17.9%), and proteinuria (12.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

When applied in the treatment of patients with BTC, surufatinib monotherapy has offered moderate clinical efficacy and shown expected tolerability and safety profiles.

Efficacy and Safety of FOLFOX as a Second-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Carcinoma Gall Bladder – Experience from a Tertiary Care Center in India

Background: Carcinoma gallbladder is mostly diagnosed in locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic stage. Best supportive care with or without palliative chemotherapy is the only feasible treatment option. Gemcitabine and platinum agents' combination is the most effective first option with no well-established second-line regimen. Objectives: We planned to study the response rate, safety, the progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) on the second-line FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. Methods: This is a prospective single-arm observational study of 29 eligible patients. Patients were studies for response to the second-line FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans were done for response assessment; chemotherapy toxicity was graded using National Cancer Institute clinical toxicity criteria; and survival rates (PFS and OS) were studied. Results: Among the 39 patients with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (CT-1), the median PFS-1 was 6.5 months. Twenty-nine patients received second-line chemotherapy (CT-2). Responses observed complete response in 2/29, partial response in 7/29, stable disease in 1/29 patients, and progressive disease in 19/29. The overall response rate was 9/29 (31.0%). Grades 2–4 toxicities were anemia (17.95%), thrombocytopenia (12.82%), neutropenia (12.82%), and peripheral neuropathy (7.69%). The median OS was 9.13 months. Late PFS-1 (>median PFS-1) patients had significantly lower mortality as compared to early PFS-1, odds ratio of 0.251 (P = 0.002), and median PFS-2 was 2.53 months. Conclusion: After the failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapy, FOLFOX-4 is modestly effective, fairly well tolerated and this needs to be proven in a larger randomized phase 3 study. Further research into the pathogenesis of biliary tract cancer with the aim to identify new targets for treatments is required.

Efficacy and Safety of FOLFOX as a Second-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Carcinoma Gall Bladder – Experience from a Tertiary Care Center in India

Background: Carcinoma gallbladder is mostly diagnosed in locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic stage. Best supportive care with or without palliative chemotherapy is the only feasible treatment option. Gemcitabine and platinum agents' combination is the most effective first option with no well-established second-line regimen. Objectives: We planned to study the response rate, safety, the progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) on the second-line FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. Methods: This is a prospective single-arm observational study of 29 eligible patients. Patients were studies for response to the second-line FOLFOX-4 chemotherapy. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans were done for response assessment; chemotherapy toxicity was graded using National Cancer Institute clinical toxicity criteria; and survival rates (PFS and OS) were studied. Results: Among the 39 patients with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (CT-1), the median PFS-1 was 6.5 months. Twenty-nine patients received second-line chemotherapy (CT-2). Responses observed complete response in 2/29, partial response in 7/29, stable disease in 1/29 patients, and progressive disease in 19/29. The overall response rate was 9/29 (31.0%). Grades 2–4 toxicities were anemia (17.95%), thrombocytopenia (12.82%), neutropenia (12.82%), and peripheral neuropathy (7.69%). The median OS was 9.13 months. Late PFS-1 (>median PFS-1) patients had significantly lower mortality as compared to early PFS-1, odds ratio of 0.251 (P = 0.002), and median PFS-2 was 2.53 months. Conclusion: After the failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapy, FOLFOX-4 is modestly effective, fairly well tolerated and this needs to be proven in a larger randomized phase 3 study. Further research into the pathogenesis of biliary tract cancer with the aim to identify new targets for treatments is required.

Survival Comparisons of Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy With mFOLFOX and Transarterial Chemoembolization in Patients With Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

Background

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) has a poor prognosis and 40%-60% of patients present with advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) have recently been used in unresectable ICC. The aim of this study was to compare the survival differences of unresectable ICC patients after TACE and HAIC treatment.

Methods

Between March 2011 and October 2019, a total of 126 patients with unresectable ICC, as evident from biopsies and imaging, and who had received TACE or HAIC were enrolled in this study. Baseline characteristics and survival differences were compared between the TACE and HAIC treatment groups.

Results

ICC Patients had significantly higher survival rates after the HAIC treatment, compared with those after TACE treatment [1-year overall survival (OS) rates: 60.2% vs. 42.9%, 2-year OS rates: 38.7% vs. 29.4%, P=0.028; 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates: 15.0% vs. 20.0%, 2-year PFS rates: 0% vs. 0%, P=0.641; 1-year only intrahepatic PFS (OIPFS) rates: 35.0% vs. 24.4%, 2-year OIPFS rates: 13.1% vs. 14.6%, P = 0.026]. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that HAIC was a significant and independent factor for OS and OIPFS in the study cohort.

Conclusions

HAIC is superior to TACE for treatment of unresectable ICC. A new tumor response evaluation procedure for HAIC treatment in unresectable ICC patients is needed to provide better therapeutic strategies. A randomized clinical trial comparing the survival benefits of HAIC and TACE is therefore being considered.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with cisplatin and doxorubicin or oxaliplatin for peritoneal metastasis from pancreatic adenocarcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma

Background

Systemic chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CC) with peritoneal metastases (PM) is affected by several pharmacological shortcomings and low clinical efficacy. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is expected to maximize exposure of peritoneal nodules to antiblastic agents. This study aims to evaluate safety and efficacy of PIPAC for PM of PDAC and CC origin.

Methods

This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive PDAC and CC cases with PM treated with PIPAC at two European referral centers for peritoneal disease. We prospectively recorded from August 2016 to May 2019 demographic, clinical, surgical, and oncological data. We performed a feasibility and safety assessment and an efficacy analysis based on clinical and pathological regression.

Results

Twenty patients with PM from PDAC (14) and CC (six) underwent 45 PIPAC administrations. Cisplatin-doxorubicin or oxaliplatin were administered to eight and 12 patients, respectively. We experienced one intraoperative complication (small bowel perforation) and 18 grade 1-2 postoperative adverse events according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. A pathological regression was recorded in 50% of patients (62% in the cisplatin-doxorubicin cohort and 42% in the oxaliplatin one). Median survival from the first PIPAC was 9.7 and 10.9 months for PDAC and CC, respectively.

Conclusion

PIPAC resulted feasible and safe without relevant toxicity issues, with both cisplatin-doxorubicin and oxaliplatin. The pathological response observed supports the evidence of antitumoral activity. Despite the study limitations, these outcomes are encouraging, recommending PIPAC in prospective, controlled trials in the palliative setting or the first line chemotherapy for PM from PDAC and CC.

Multi-institutional retrospective analysis of FOLFIRI in patients with advanced biliary tract cancers

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine plus platinum is the standard of care first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancers (BTC). There is no established second-line therapy, and retrospective reviews report median progression-free survival (PFS) less than 3 mo on second-line therapy. 5-Fluorouracil plus irinotecan (FOLFIRI) is a commonly used regimen in patients with BTC who have progressed on gemcitabine plus platinum, though there is a paucity of data regarding its efficacy in this population.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of FOLFIRI in patients with biliary tract cancers.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with advanced BTC who were treated with FOLFIRI at MD Anderson, University of Michigan and Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville. Data were collected on patient demographics, BTC subtype, response per RECIST v1.1, progression and survival.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients were included of which 74 (75%) had metastatic and 24 (25%) had locally advanced disease at the time of treatment with FOLFIRI. The median age was 60 (range, 22-86) years. The number of patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, gall bladder cancer and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were 10, 17 and 71, respectively. FOLFIRI was used as 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd or 4^th – N^th lines in 8, 50, 36 and 4 patients, respectively. Median duration on FOLFIRI in the entire cohort was 2.2 (range, 0.5-8.4) mo. The median PFS and overall survival were 2.4 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.7-3.1) and 6.6 (95%CI: 4.7-8.4) mo, respectively. Median PFS for patients treated with FOLFIRI in 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd or 4^th – N^th lines were 3.1, 2.5, 2.3 and 1.5 mo, respectively. Eighteen patients received concurrent bevacizumab (n = 13) or EGFR-targeted therapy (n = 5) with FOLFIRI, with a median PFS of 2.7 mo (95%CI: 1.7-5.1).

CONCLUSION

In this largest multi-institution retrospective review of 98 patients with BTC treated with FOLFIRI, efficacy appears to be modest with outcomes similar to other cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens.

Second-line therapy in advanced upper gastrointestinal cancers: current status and new prospects

The prognosis of patients with advanced upper gastrointestinal cancers (UGC) remains poor. Current available systemic armamentarium is limited, and little progress has been made over the last decades. Main achievements have been obtained in first-line setting, however an increasingly proportion of patients are considered for second-line therapy, although data from randomized trials are scarce or even lacking. In this comprehensive review we examine the literature to summarize the efficacy and limitations of second-line systemic options in patients with advanced UGC, with a glimpse into the innovations.

Comparison of FOLFIRINOX Chemotherapy with Other Regimens in Patients with Biliary Tract Cancers: a Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the different treatment options of patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) who were treated with platinum-gemcitabine (CG) or platinum-5-fluorouracil (CF) or 5-Fluorouracil-oxaliplatin-irinotecan (FOLFIRINOX) chemotherapy.

METHODS

We included the patients with advanced BTC who were registered at the Department of Oncology in Gaziantep University between January 2008 and January 2016. The following data were analyzed: disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS) of first and second-line of chemotherapy, and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test was used to compare two survival curves, and hazard regression model was used to evaluate risk factors for PFS.

RESULT

Ninety-two patients were recruited. 53 (57.6 %), 27 (29.3 %), and 12 (13 %) patients received CG, CF, and FOLFIRINOX regimen as first-line chemotherapy, respectively. Median PFS and DCR of CG group were 22 weeks and 56.6 %, and these were 12 weeks and 44.4 % for CF group, and 9 weeks and 41.7 % for FOLFIRINOX group. Median OS of CG, CF, and FOLFIRINOX groups was 28, 21,and 23.5 weeks, respectively (p = 0.497). Second-line PFS of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy group and gemcitabine-based chemotherapy group was 12 vs. 14 weeks (p = 0.988). Second-line PFS of FOLFIRINOX was 20 weeks, whereas it was 14 weeks for other fuoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies (p = 0.190).

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first study evaluating the FOLFIRINOX regimen in BTC. Cisplatin-gemcitabine therapy still provides better survival in BCT. However, FOLFIRINOX can be an option in the second-line treatment of BTC patients who are eligible for chemotherapy.

Phase II study of fixed dose-rate gemcitabine plus S-1 as a second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine plus platinum is considered standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. However, no standard second-line therapy has been established for this disease. According to reports, S-1 exerts anti-tumor effects on advanced biliary tract cancer and gemcitabine is more effective via fixed dose-rate administration. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a combination of fixed dose-rate gemcitabine and S-1 after failure of gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy.

METHODS

This single-arm phase II study (clinical trial number: UMIN000005918) set the response rate as the primary endpoint and used a MiniMax two-stage design with a null hypothesis < 7% and alternative hypothesis ≥ 25%. Thirty-five patients were needed to yield a power of 90% and α value of 0.05. Patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m², div, 100-min period, day 1) and S-1 (40 mg/m² twice daily, oral, days 1-7), every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerable adverse events were observed.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were enrolled, and 3 of 23 first-stage patients responded. The overall response rate was 9.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7-19.2%]. The median overall and progression-free survival were 7.0 [95% CI: 5.3-8.6] and 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.6-3.5), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were leukopenia (19.5%), neutropenia (19.5%), anemia (14.6%), thrombocytopenia (7.3%), and anorexia (4.8%).

CONCLUSION

Second-line fixed dose-rate gemcitabine plus S-1 was not sufficiently effective and tolerable in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer refractory to gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus cisplatin.

Combination Therapy with Capecitabine and Cisplatin as Second-Line Chemotherapy for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer

Background/Aims: Palliative chemotherapy is the main treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). However, there is a lack of established second-line chemotherapy to treat disease progression after first-line chemotherapy. We examined combination therapy with capecitabine and cisplatin for advanced BTC as a second-line regimen. Methods: We analyzed the medical records of 40 patients diagnosed with BTC who received palliative second-line chemotherapy with capecitabine and cisplatin. Results: The median overall survival from the start of second-line chemotherapy was 6.3 months. The median overall survival from diagnosis was 17.9 months. The median progression-free survival during second-line chemotherapy was 2.3 months. Nine (30%) patients experienced adverse events of grade ≥3. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score was an independent predictor of adverse events. Conclusions: Combination therapy with capecitabine and cisplatin may be an option for second-line chemotherapy in some of patients with advanced BTC.

Phase 2 study of combination SPI-1620 with docetaxel as second-line advanced biliary tract cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

This multicentre, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of SPI-1620, an analogue of endothelin-1, administered in combination with docetaxel as second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABTC).

METHODS

Eligible patients received continuous cycles of combination therapy with SPI-1620 (11 μg m^-2) and docetaxel (75 mg m^-2) intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression (PD) or intolerable toxicity. Tumour response was evaluated using computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging every 2 cycles (6 weeks). The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, and overall survival (OS) that were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Of the 30 enrolled patients, 25 patients had qualifying events (PD or death), 1 patient was nonevaluable, and 4 patients were censored at the time of their last tumour assessment. Our primary end point of PFS ⩾5 months was not reached. Median PFS was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4-2.8), ranging from 0.7 to 8.4 months. The ORR was 10.3% (95% CI: 0.02-0.27). Eleven additional patients achieved stable disease. The OS was 4.87 months. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were febrile neutropenia and neutropenia.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of docetaxel to SPI-1620 in second-line ABTC did not meet the pre-specified primary end point of PFS ⩾5 months in unselected patient population.

[Chemotherapy for Biliary Tract Cancer]

The term of biliary tract cancer (BTC) refers to all tumors that arise from the biliary tract or the biliary drainage system, including the intra- and extra-hepatic bile ducts as well as the gallbladder. BTCs are aggressive tumors with limited treatment options and poor overall survival. Currently, surgery remains to be the only potentially curative treatment, and most patients develop recurrence. For advanced tumors, only limited effective treatment modalities exist today. Gemcitabine plus cisplatin is considered as a standard option for advanced biliary cancer. A randomized phase III trial (ABC-02 trial) showed superiority of gemcitabine plus cisplatin over gemcitabine alone. In that study, they showed that after a median follow-up of 8.2 months, the median overall survival was 8.1 months in the gemcitabine-only group and 11.7 months in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin group (p<0.001). However, while this is a definite advancement, a 3-month survival extension among patients with BTC is modest at best. Moreover, this regimen has not been compared head-to-head with other gemcitabine based combinations. Gemcitabine monotherapy, 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin, and single-agent capecitabine are all reasonable options for patients with a borderline performance status. Recent advancements have provided new insight into the genomic landscape of BTCs, and thus, it remains unclear whether combined treatment with molecular targeted agents or other cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents may also be effective against advanced BTC.

Second-Line Palliative Chemotherapy in Advanced Gall Bladder Cancer, CAP-IRI: Safe and Effective Option

INTRODUCTION

Gall bladder cancer (GBC) has high prevalence in the Indo-Gangetic belt in India. While the first-line chemotherapy (CT1) has been established as gemcitabine-platinum doublet in advanced GBC, there is no standard recommendation or guidelines regarding feasibility of second-line therapy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who received second-line of chemotherapy (CT2) at our institution from July 2012 to December 2014. Patient records were examined for efficacy and toxicity of administered CT2, along with response rates (RR) and survival. Potential prognostic factors were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients received CT2 in the predefined period. Ninety-nine percent of patients had received a gemcitabine-based regimen as CT1 with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5 months before CT2. 51.7 % patients had undergone surgery prior with 5.7 % patients having received radiotherapy previously. Prior to beginning CT2, PS was 0/1 in 67.8 % patients, albumin was >4 g% in 40.2 % and CA 19.9 was raised in a majority (66.7 %) patients, respectively. As per institution protocol, a majority of patients (89.6 %) were administered CAP-IRI regimen. Overall RR and disease control rates (DCR) were 21.8 % and 41.3 %, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6 and 8 months, with no significant differences between CAP-IRI and other regimens. Adverse effects were tolerable, with dose reduced upfront in 23 % patients and 11.5 % patients during subsequent cycles of CT. ECOG Performance Status (PS) of 0/1 was a significant prognostic variable for OS on multivariate analysis (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

CAP-IRI is a well-tolerated second-line chemotherapeutic regimen in patients with advanced GBC. Careful selection of patients is required when administering second-line chemotherapy to advanced GBC patients, with particular emphasis on ECOG PS.

Chemotherapy in patients with hepatobiliary cancers and abnormal hepatic function

Sorafenib and cisplatin plus gemcitabine currently represent first-line treatment standards in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary cancer, respectively. Conventional cytotoxic agents (monotherapy or combination therapy) have demonstrated activity in the second-line setting or in those in which first-line agents are contraindicated. A strategy for safe yet effective administration of such systemic therapies in patients with advanced hepatobiliary cancer and abnormal liver function needs to be strongly considered. Here, we highlight the safety and tolerability of systemic therapies routinely used for the treatment of advanced hepatobiliary cancer in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Based on data from available clinical studies, we review dosing strategies recommended for chemotherapy and targeted therapy in those with liver dysfunction. Dose modifications for many agents in this population remain empiric due to limited clinical evidence. Future dedicated phase I studies are needed to provide further dosing considerations for combination therapy in those with abnormal liver function in which data is lacking.

Therapeutic options for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a heterogeneous group of cancers, which is composed of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECCA), gallbladder cancers and ampullary carcinomas. While all anatomic subgroups are treated uniformly, our understanding about the pathogenesis has allowed us to reason that each group represents a clinically and genetically diverse disease. The majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease, where the standard treatment is combination systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. While most receive a clinical benefit from chemotherapy, patients eventually progress where no standardized therapies are available in the refractory setting. With the use of next generation sequencing, we have come to understand that ICCA is a diverse genomic disease with many actionable alterations that may serve as potential therapeutic targets. Further studies investigating the role of novel targeted agents (as a single agent or with combination chemotherapy) will hopefully provide additional treatment options for this highly lethal disease.

Biliary cancer: intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma vs. extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma vs. gallbladder cancers: classification and therapeutic implications

Biliary cancers (BCs) are a diverse group of tumors that arise from the bile duct epithelium and are divided into cholangiocarcinomas of the intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) and cancer of the gallbladder. Despite improvements in treatment and diagnosis, BCs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage and associated with poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Recent discoveries have allowed us to have a better understanding of the genomic diversity in BC, and identify genes that are likely contributing to its pathogenesis, proliferation and treatment resistance. Additionally, these advances have allowed us to reason that each anatomic group within BC behave as distinct diseases, with differences in prognosis and outcomes. Based on this knowledge, recent advances have allowed us to identify actionable mutations that form rational therapeutic targets with novel agents, where their relevance will be better understood through the completion of prospective clinical trials.

Second-line chemotherapy in advanced biliary cancer progressed to first-line platinum-gemcitabine combination: a multicenter survey and pooled analysis with published data

Background

After progression to a standard first-line platinum and gemcitabine combination (GP), there is no established second-line therapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancers (aBTC). Indeed, literature data suggest limited activity of most second-line agents evaluated so far.

Methods

We collected a large retrospective series of aBTC patients treated with second-line chemotherapy after progression to a first-line GP regimen at different Italian institutions. We then pooled the data with those reported in previous studies, which were identified with a Medline search and the on-line abstract datasets of major international oncology meetings.

Results

A total of 174 patients were included in the multicenter survey: response rate (RR) with second-line chemotherapy was low (3.4 %), with median PFS and OS of 3.0 months and 6.6 months, respectively. At multivariate analysis, preserved performance status, low CA19.9 levels and absence of distant metastases were favorable prognostic factors. Data from other five presented or published series were identified, for a total of 499 patients included in the pooled analysis. The results confirmed marginal activity of second-line chemotherapy (RR: 10.2 %), with limited efficacy in unselected patient populations (median PFS: 3.1 months; median OS: 6.3 months).

Conclusions

The current analysis highlights the limited value of second-line chemotherapy after a first-line GP combination in aBTC. While waiting for effective biologic agents in this setting, ongoing randomized trials will identify the optimal second-line chemotherapy regimen and validate prognostic factors for individual patient management.

Recent advances for the treatment of pancreatic and biliary tract cancer after first-line treatment failure

Here, we evaluate clinical trials on chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic or biliary tract cancer after first-line treatment failure. Clinical trials on conventional and innovative medical treatments for progressive pancreatic and biliary cancer were analyzed. Metronomic chemotherapy, which consists of the administration of continuative low-dose of anticancer drugs, was also considered. A significant extension of overall survival was achieved with second-line, regimens in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. Moreover, many Phase II studies, including chemotherapy and target molecules and immunotherapy, have reported promising results, in both pancreatic and biliary cancer. However, data in these patients' setting are very heterogeneous, and only few randomized studies are available.

Second-line chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer after failure of the gemcitabine-platinum combination: A large multicenter study by the Association des Gastro-Entérologues Oncologues

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on second-line chemotherapy (CT2) for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABTC). The aim of this multicenter study was to describe the CT2 regimens used, the response rates, and the outcomes of patients treated with various CT2 regimens.

METHODS

Patients who received CT2 for ABTC at 17 French institutions after the failure of the gemcitabine-platinum combination were retrospectively studied. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox models were used for multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Among 603 patients who received first-line chemotherapy (CT1) for ABTC, 196 received CT2: 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and irinotecan (n = 64), 5-FU and oxaliplatin (n = 21), 5-FU and cisplatin (n = 38), 5-FU or capecitabine (n = 40), sunitinib (n = 10), or other various regimens (n = 23). Among the 186 assessable patients, there were 22 partial responses and 70 stabilizations. After a median follow-up of 26.4 months, the median PFS and OS were 3.2 and 6.7 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in PFS or OS between CT2 regimens. Fluoropyrimidine-based doublet chemotherapy was not superior to fluoropyrimidine alone in terms of OS and PFS. In a multivariate analysis, a performance status of 0 to 1, disease control with CT1, and a carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) level ≤ 400 IU/mL were significantly associated with longer PFS and OS. Grade 3 to 4 toxicity occurred in 32% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CT2 might provide disease control for selected patients with ABTC after the failure of gemcitabine-platinum, but the prognosis remains poor. No particular regimen seems superior to others, and this calls for new treatments. A good performance status, disease control with CT1, and a low level of CA 19-9 were associated with longer survival.

Second-line systemic treatment for advanced cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine plus platinum (GEM-P) combination chemotherapy is standard treatment for first-line advanced cholangiocarcinoma (aCC). GEM-P first-line therapy reports a progression-free survival (PFS) of 8 months and overall survival (OS) of 11.7 months. Treatment in the second-line setting is less clear. Five-year survival for aCC remains dismal at 5-10%. The purpose of this study was to describe the outcomes with second-line systemic treatment at our institution.

METHODS

This study was a single institution retrospective chart review of aCC patients who initiated second-line systemic treatment during 1/1/2009 to 12/31/2012. The primary objective was to evaluate PFS with second-line systemic treatment. Secondary objectives were OS and disease control rate. Second-line systemic regimens were classified into four treatment groups: GEM-P, gemcitabine + fluoropyrimidine (GEM-FU), other FU combination (FU-combo), and others.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were included and the majority had intrahepatic aCC. A total of 80% received first-line gemcitabine-based therapy. Second-line therapy consisted of GEM-P (19.6%), GEM-FU (28.6%), FU-combo (37.5%), and others (14.3%). Median PFS was 2.7-month (95% CI, 2.3-3.8 months) with a median OS of 13.8 months (95% CI, 12-19.3 months) and a disease control rate of 50%. No significant difference in survival was identified between the four treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed a 2.7-month PFS, 50% disease control rate, and potential survival benefit with second-line treatment. Options for second-line systemic therapy include GEM-FU, FU-combo, GEM-P if not given in the first-line setting. Targeted therapy with erlotinib or bevacizumab could be considered in addition to chemotherapy.