Page 46 - Read Online
P. 46

Hewitt et al. Hepatoma Res 2021;7:75  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2394-5079.2021.83  Page 9 of 19



 Table 1. Randomized clinical trials of chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer

 Takada et al. [125]  PRODIGE12/ACCORD18  BILCAP                  BCAT
 Study arms  5FU + mitomycin vs. observation  GEMOX vs. observation  Capecitabine vs. observation  Gemcitabine vs. observation

 Recruitment   April 1986-June 1992  July 2009-February 2014  March 2006-December 2017  September 2007-January 2011
 period
 Total sample   436  196  447                                     225
 size

 Disease   CCA 118 (27%)   ICCA 86 (44%)   ICCA 84 (19%)          PCCA 101
 distribution  PDAC 158 (36%)   PCCA 15 (8%)   PCCA 128 (28%)     DCCA 124
 GBC 112 (26%)   DCCA 55 (28%)   DCCA 156 (35%)
 Ampulla 48 (11%)  GBC 38 (20%)  GBC 79 (18%)
 Primary   OS  RFS and time to definitive deterioration  OS       OS
 endpoints  of HRQOL

 Secondary   DFS, ECOG PS, improvement in body weight, adverse events  OS, toxicity, and exploratory   Per-protocol analysis of OS/RFS, RFS, toxicity,   RFS and toxicity
 endpoints  translational endpoint  health economics, and quality of life

 Completion of   80% completion  Median of 10 cycles of 10 for   55% completed chemotherapy, 10 patients (4%)  52.1% completed chemotherapy
 therapy  gemcitabine and oxaliplatin  had 0 cycles, 32% discontinued therapy due to
                     toxicity                                     18 patients stopped Gem due to
                                                                  needing tor dose reduction
 Results  5-year OS improved in patients with GBC who received adjuvant   No difference in OS, RFS, or   No significant difference in OS in intention to treat  Gemcitabine provided no
 therapy (26.0% vs. 14.4%, P = 0.0367) and 5 year DFS (20.3% vs.   deterioration of HRQOL   population   difference in OS or RFS
 11.6%, P = 0.0210)   Significant improvement with capecitabine in OS
 No difference in OS or DFS in patients with PDAC, CCA, or   and RFS in prespecified per-protocol analysis
 ampullary cancer
 Relapse rate  79.9% adjuvant therapy   62.1% adjuvant therapy   60% adjuvant therapy   53.8% adjuvant therapy
 88.4% observation  67.7% observation  65% observation            56.5% observation

 GBC: Gallbladder cancer; CCA: cholangiocarcinoma; PDAC: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; ECC: extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; ICC: intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; 5FU: 5-fluorouracil; OS: overall survival;
 DFS: disease-free survival; RFS: recurrence-free survival; ECOG PS: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; HRQOL: health-related quality of life; ICCA: intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma; PCC:
 peripheral cholangiocarcinoma; DCCA: distal cholangiocarcinoma; GEMOX: gemcitabine oxaliplatin; BACT: bile duct adjuvant cancer trial.



 primary endpoint was OS with secondary endpoints of progression-free survival, tumor response, and adverse events. Of the 410 patients randomized, 149
 patients had gallbladder cancer, 241 had cholangiocarcinoma, and 20 had ampullary cancer; 204 received cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 206 received

 gemcitabine alone.



 At a median follow-up of 8.2 months, the median OS was significantly higher in patients who received cisplatin-gemcitabine than the gemcitabine alone (11.7
 months vs. 8.1 months; hazard ratio = 0.64; 95%CI: 0.52-0.80; P < 0.001). Additionally, patients who received cisplatin-gemcitabine had improved PFS (8.0
   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51