Capecitabine with/without mitomycin C: results of a randomized phase II trial of second-line therapy in advanced biliary tract adenocarcinoma

Systemic therapy for pretreated advanced biliary tract cancer: past developments and recent advances

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) remains among the most challenging malignancies with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options, particularly in pretreated patients. As most patients experience disease progression after first-line treatment, effective second-line and subsequent treatments are required. Although the addition of modified FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) to active symptom control improved the overall survival of patients with progressing advanced BTC despite gemcitabine plus cisplatin treatment, its efficacy was modest. Moreover, most clinical trials demonstrated modest efficacy of molecular-targeted agents for molecularly unselected pretreated advanced BTC. Patients with advanced BTC carry a relatively high druggable genetic alteration rate and have shown promising responses to molecular-matched therapies targeting gene alterations such as FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, IDH1 mutation, and HER2 overexpression/amplification. Additionally, tumor-agnostic approaches, including BRAF V600E, NTRK fusion, and RET fusion, have expanded the treatment options for some patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown limited efficacy as mono- or combination therapy in patients with pretreated advanced BTC. Therefore, developmental efforts have shifted to immune checkpoint inhibitor and other combinations such as vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors or radiation. In addition to refining combination strategies to enhance the therapeutic potential of immune checkpoint inhibitor, future research should focus on elucidating the tumor microenvironment. This review delineates the evolution of systemic therapies in patients with pretreated advanced BTC. By examining past developments and recent advances through prospective trials, it highlights novel approaches that may improve outcomes in this challenging disease.

Management of intrahepatic and perihilar cholangiocarcinomas: Guidelines of the French Association for the Study of the Liver (AFEF)

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the second most common malignant primary liver cancer. iCCA may develop on an underlying chronic liver disease and its incidence is growing in relation with the epidemics of obesity and metabolic diseases. In contrast, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) may follow a history of chronic inflammatory diseases of the biliary tract. The initial management of CCAs is often complex and requires multidisciplinary expertise. The French Association for the Study of the Liver wished to organize guidelines in order to summarize the best evidence available about several key points in iCCA and pCCA. These guidelines have been elaborated based on the level of evidence available in the literature and each recommendation has been analysed, discussed and voted by the panel of experts. They describe the epidemiology of CCA as well as how patients with iCCA or pCCA should be managed from diagnosis to treatment. The most recent developments of personalized medicine and use of targeted therapies are also highlighted.

MiR-380 inhibits the proliferation and invasion of cholangiocarcinoma cells by silencing LIS1

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine the role and regulatory mechanism of miR-380 in cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

The TargetScan database and a dual-luciferase reporter assay system were used to determine if LIS1 was a target gene of miR-380. The Cell Counting Kit 8 assay, flow cytometry, and Transwell assay were used to detect the effects of miR-380 and LIS1 on the proliferation, S-phase ratio, and invasiveness of HCCC-9810/HuCCT1/QBC939 cells. Western blotting was used to determine the effect of miR-380 on MMP-2/p-AKT. Immunohistochemistry detected the regulatory effect of miR-380 on the expression of MMP-2/p-AKT/LIS1.

RESULTS

Expression of miR-380 in cholangiocarcinoma was decreased but expression of LIS1 was increased. LIS1 was confirmed to be a target gene of miR-380. Transfection with miR-380 mimics inhibited the proliferation, S-phase arrest, and invasion of HCCC-9810/HuCCT1/QBC939 cells, and LIS1 reversed these inhibitory effects. miR-380 inhibitor promoted proliferation, S-phase ratio, and invasiveness of HCCC-9810/HuCCT1/QBC939 cells. si-LIS1 salvaged the promotive effect of miR-380 inhibitor. Overexpression of miR-380 inhibited expression of MMP-2/p-AKT/LIS1, but miR-380 inhibitor promoted their expression.

CONCLUSION

An imbalance of miR-380 expression is closely related to cholangiocarcinoma, and overexpression of miR-380 inhibits the expression of MMP-2/p-AKT by directly targeting LIS1.

Clinical outcomes for previously treated patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: a meta-analysis

Aim: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy of treatments for previously treated advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients. Materials & methods: Databases were searched for studies evaluating treatments for advanced (unresectable and/or metastatic) BTC patients who progressed on prior therapy. Pooled estimates of objective response rate (ORR), median overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Results: Across 31 studies evaluating chemotherapy or targeted treatment regimens in an unselected advanced BTC patient population, pooled ORR was 6.9%, median OS was 6.6 months and median PFS was 3.2 months. Conclusion: The efficacy of conventional treatments for previously treated advanced BTC patients is poor and could be improved by novel therapies.

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.

Chemotherapy for Biliary Tract Cancer in 2021

Biliary tract cancer refers to a group of malignancies including cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer. While surgical resection is considered the only curative treatment, postoperative recurrence can sometimes occur. Adjuvant chemotherapy is used to prolong prognosis in some cases. Many unresectable cases are also treated with chemotherapy. Therefore, systemic chemotherapy is widely introduced for the treatment of biliary tract cancer. Evidence on chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer is recently on the increase. Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin is currently the standard of care for first-line chemotherapy in advanced cases. Recently, FOLFOX also demonstrated efficacy as a second-line treatment. In addition, efficacies of isocitrate dehydrogenase inhibitors and fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitors have been shown. In the adjuvant setting, capecitabine monotherapy has become the standard of care in Western countries. In addition to conventional cytotoxic agents, molecular-targeted agents and immunotherapy have been evaluated in multiple clinical trials. Genetic testing is used to check for genetic alterations and molecular-targeted agents and immunotherapy are introduced based on tumor characteristics. In this article, we review the latest evidence of chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer.

Second-line Chemotherapy Prolongs Survival in Real World Patients With Advanced Biliary Tract and Gallbladder Cancers: A Multicenter Retrospective Population-based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence is available regarding the survival benefit of second-line therapy in real world patients with advanced biliary tract and gallbladder cancer. Until very recently, there was a lack of randomized clinical trials to address this important question. In this multicenter population-based cohort study, the authors evaluated whether second-line therapy improves the survival of real world patients with advanced biliary tract and gallbladder cancer.

METHODS

Patients with biopsy-proven advanced biliary tract and gallbladder cancer who were diagnosed during the period of 2006 to 2015 and had received first-line chemotherapy were assessed. Cox proportional multivariate analysis was performed to determine the survival benefit of second-line therapy.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-six eligible patients with a median age of 66 years and male:female ratio of 1:1.34 were identified. Sixty-eight percent of patients had metastatic disease. Primary tumor sites were as follows: gallbladder 31%, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma 36%, extrahepatic bile duct 23%, and ampullary cancer 10%. Overall, 37% of patients received second-line therapy. The median overall survival of the treatment group was 17 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.5-21.5) compared with 7 months (95% CI: 5.3-8.7) in the control (P<0.0001). Patients who received combination chemotherapy had a median overall survival of 20 months (14.0-26.1) compared with 17 months (13.5-20.5) if they received single-agent second-line therapy (P=0.73). Multivariate analysis of second-line therapy, hazard ratio: 0.55 (95% CI: 0.36-0.83) and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio >2, HR: 1.10 (1.05-1.15) showed a significant correlation with survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This well-designed population-based retrospective cohort study suggests that second-line chemotherapy improves survival of real world patients with advanced biliary tract and gallbladder cancers and should be offered to the patients who are potential candidates for chemotherapy.

Therapy for advanced cholangiocarcinoma: Current knowledge and future potential

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a biliary epithelial tumour that can emerge at any point in the biliary tree. It is commonly classified based on its anatomical site of development into intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PCC) and distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC), each of which is associated with varying patient demographics, molecular characteristics and treatment options. CCA patients have poor overall prognoses and 5‐year survival rates. Additionally, CCA is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, with surgical treatment restricted to early‐stage disease. Owing to an increase in the incidence of ICC, that of CCA is also on the rise, with a corresponding increase in the associated mortality, particularly in South America and Asia. Therefore, the development of an effective treatment is crucial to improve the survival of CCA patients. We aimed to systematically review the current understanding of advanced CCA treatment and discuss potential effective strategies.

Fluropyrimidine single agent or doublet chemotherapy as second line treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer

Fluoropyrimidine (FP) plus platinum chemotherapy has been recently established as a second-line (L2) preferred option in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) (ABC-06 phase III trial). However, the overall survival (OS) benefit was limited and comparison with FP monotherapy was not available. Our aim was to assess the OS of patients treated with a FP monotherapy compared to a doublet with irinotecan or platinum in L2. We performed a retrospective analysis of two large multicenter prospective cohorts: a French cohort (28 centers) and an Italian cohort (9 centers). All consecutive patients with aBTC receiving FP-based L2 after gemcitabine plus cisplatin/gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin L1 between 2003 and 2016 were included. A subgroup analysis according to performance status (PS) and an exploratory analysis according to platinum sensitivity in L1 were planned. In the French cohort (n = 351), no significant OS difference was observed between the FP monotherapy and doublet groups (median OS: 5.6 vs 6.8 months, P = .65). Stratification on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS showed similar results in PS 0-1 and 2. Median OS was not different between FP monotherapy, platinum- and irinotecan-based doublets (5.6 vs 7.1 vs 6.7 months, P = .68). Similar findings were observed in the Italian cohort (n = 174) and in the sensitivity analysis in pooled cohorts (n = 525). No L2 regimen seemed superior over others in the platinum resistant/refractory or sensitive subgroups. Our results suggest that FP monotherapy is as active as FP doublets in aBTC in L2, regardless of the patient PS and country, and could be a therapeutic option in this setting.

Capecitabine plus Oxaliplatin as a Second-Line Therapy for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase II Trial

Background: Although biliary tract cancer (BTC) has a very aggressive nature, some patients maintain a relatively good performance status after failure with first-line treatment of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC). Thus, tolerable, feasible, and useful second-line treatments are needed for these patients. We investigated the efficacy of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as a second-line therapy for patients with advanced BTC who failed first-line GC treatment. Methods: In this prospective, phase II trial, we investigated XELOX (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m² twice daily on days 1-14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² on day 1) as a second-line treatment, given every 3 weeks, totaling 8 cycles in patients with metastatic BTC who failed first-line GC treatment. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: From December 2015 to November 2016, 50 patients with metastatic intrahepatic or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or gall bladder (GB) cancer were enrolled. The regimen was well tolerated. Toxicities mainly consisted of grade 1 or 2 events, and thrombocytopenia and neuropathy had the highest incidence. In intent-to-treat analysis, one complete response (CR) and six partial responses (PRs) were recorded with XELOX treatment. The overall response rate and the disease control rate from the intent-to-treat analysis were 14% and 52%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 15.6 months, PFS after XELOX was a median of 15.4 weeks (95% CI, 8.5-22.3). This PFS value supported the statistical hypothesis of this study. The median overall survival was 32.7 weeks (95% CI, 21.4-43.9). Conclusion: This phase II trial showed that XELOX treatment was efficacious and had a tolerable toxicity profile in patients with advanced BTC who failed first-line treatment of gemcitabine and cisplatin.

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.