Chemotherapy Compared with Best Supportive Care for Metastatic/Unresectable Gallbladder Cancer: a Non-randomized Prospective Cohort Study

Gallbladder cancer: Progress in the Indian subcontinent

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is one of the commonest biliary malignancies seen in India, Argentina, and Japan. The disease has dismal outcome as it is detected quite late due to nonspecific symptoms and signs. Early detection is the only way to improve the outcome. There have been several advances in basic as well as clinical research in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic diseases in the West and other developed countries but not enough has been done in GBC. Therefore, it is important and the responsibility of the countries with high burden of GBC to find solutions to the many unanswered questions like etiopathogenesis, early diagnosis, treatment, and prognostication. As India being one of the largest hubs for GBC in the world, it is important to know how the country has progressed on GBC. In this review, we will discuss the outcome of the publications from India highlighting the work and the developments taken place in past several decades both in basic and clinical research.

Anticancer Drugs Compared to No Anticancer Drugs in Patients with Advanced Hepatobiliary Cancer: A Mapping Review and Evidence Gap Map

Introduction

Despite being commonly recommended, the impact of anticancer drugs (ACDs) on patient-important outcomes beyond survival for advanced hepatobiliary cancers (HBCs) may not have been sufficiently assessed. We aim to identify and map the evidence regarding ACDs versus best supportive care (BSC) for advanced HBCs, considering patient-centered outcomes.

Methods

In this mapping review, we included systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and observational studies comparing ACDs (chemotherapy, immunotherapy, biological/targeted therapy) versus BSC for advanced HBCs. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. Two reviewers performed the screening and data extraction processes. We developed evidence maps for each type of cancer.

Results

We included 87 studies (60 for advanced liver cancer and 27 for gallbladder or bile duct cancers). Most of the evidence favored ACDs for survival outcomes, and BSC for toxicity. We identified several evidence gaps for non-survival outcomes, including quality of life or quality of end-of-life care.

Discussion

Patient-important outcomes beyond survival in advanced HBCs are insufficiently assessed by the available evidence. Future studies need to address these gaps to better inform decision-making processes.

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.

Novel biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of gallbladder cancer

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the most common form of biliary tract malignancy with a dismal prognosis. A poor outcome in patients with GBC is related to the aggressive nature of the tumor, delayed diagnosis, and a lack of reliable biomarkers and effective treatment. Therefore, early diagnosis and accurate disease assessment are crucial to prolonging the patient survival. Identification of novel prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers may help improve the early diagnostic rate and develop specific targeted treatments for patients with GBC. We herein review the novel biomarkers that may be associated with the diagnosis and prognosis in GBC and their potential clinical significance in the management of GBC.

The Evaluation of 17 Gastrointestinal Tumor Markers Reveals Prognosis Value for MUC6, CK17, and CD10 in Gallbladder-Cancer Patients

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an aggressive and highly lethal disease with relatively low global incidence, but one that constitutes a major health problem in Asian and Latin American countries, particularly in Chile. The identification of new tumor-associated markers with potential prognosis value is required for GBC clinical practice. Using immunohistochemistry/tumor tissue microarray, we evaluated the expression of 17 gastrointestinal tumor-associated protein markers (CK7, CK17, CK19, CK20, CKLMW, CKHMW, MUC1, MUC2, MUC5AC, MUC6, CA125, CD10, CEA, vimentin, villin, claudin-4, and CDX2) in primary gallbladder adenocarcinomas from 180 Chilean patients and analyzed potential associations with their pathological and clinical characteristics. Younger female patients with well- to moderately differentiated tumors had a better prognosis than that of older female or male patients with tumors with a similar tumor differentiation grade. Among all analyzed markers, MUC6 expression was associated with better prognosis in patients with well- to moderately differentiated tumors, whereas CK17 or CD10 was associated with worse prognosis in patients with poorly differentiated tumors. In addition, the MUC6⁺CK17^– expression pattern was strongly associated with better prognosis in patients with well- to moderately differentiated tumors, whereas patients with poorly differentiated tumors and with the CK17⁺CD10⁺ expression pattern showed worse prognosis. Our results suggest that tumor MUC6, CK17, and CD10 can be considered as potential prognosis markers for GBC.

Molecular pathways and potential biomarkers in gallbladder cancer: A comprehensive review

The most common malignancy of the biliary tract, gallbladder cancer (GBC) often has a dismal prognosis. The aggressive nature of the tumor, delayed diagnosis at advanced stages of the disease, and lack of effective treatment options are some of the factors that contribute to a poor outcome. Early detection and accurate assessment of disease burden is critical to optimize management and improve long-term survival, as well as identify patients for adjuvant therapy and clinical trials. With recent advances in the understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of GBC, several specific diagnostic and biomarkers have been proposed as being of diagnostic and prognostic importance. Indeed, identification of novel diagnostic and prognostic markers has an important role in early diagnosis and development of targeted therapies among patients with GBC. Next-generation sequencing technology and genomewide data analysis have provided novel insight into understanding the molecular pathogenesis of biliary tract cancers, thereby identifying potential biomarkers for clinical use. We herein review available GBC biomarkers and the potential clinical implications in the management of GBC.

Gallbladder Cancer: Diagnosis, Surgical Management, and Adjuvant Therapies

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an often lethal disease, but surgical resection is potentially curative. Symptoms may be misdiagnosed as biliary colic; over half of new diagnoses are made after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for presumed benign disease. Gallbladder polyps >1 cm should prompt additional imaging and cholecystectomy. For GBC diagnosed after cholecystectomy, tumors T1b and greater necessitate radical cholecystectomy. Radical cholecystectomy includes staging laparoscopy, hepatic resection, and locoregional lymph node clearance to achieve R0 resection. Patients with locally advanced disease (T3 or T4), hepatic-sided T2 tumors, node positivity, or R1 resection may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy increases survival in unresectable disease.

Prospective multicenter phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with unresectable gallbladder cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus cisplatin in Japanese patients with unresectable gallbladder cancer (GBC).

METHODS

Chemo-naïve patients with histologically proven unresectable GBC were enrolled in this study. The patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. A response assessment was done by CT scan every 4 weeks. The primary end points were to determine the response rates [RR; complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)] and the disease control rate [DCR; CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. The secondary end points were to evaluate toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From March 2012 to February 2015, 14 patients from seven different institutions were enrolled in the study, and 13 cases were evaluable for assessment. Eleven cases (84.6%) had distant metastases, and 8 cases (61.5%) had obstructive jaundice. There was no CR, 1 PR (7.7%), 11 SD (84.6%), and 1 progressive disease (PD) (7.7%). The RR was 7.7%, whereas the DCR was 92.3%. The median PFS was 3.1 months, the median OS was 6.2 months, and the one-year survival rate was 0%. Grade 3 hematologic toxicity was observed in three cases (23%), but all of them recovered upon drug withdrawal, and there was no treatment-related death.

CONCLUSION

Although gemcitabine plus cisplatin has a high DCR (92.3%) and relatively low toxicity, the RR is less than 10%, and development of new therapies is desired for the treatment of unresectable GBC.

Surgical treatment for gallbladder cancer - a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate existing evidence regarding surgical treatments for gallbladder cancer in a Health Technology Assessment. A specific aim was to evaluate whether extended surgery regarding liver, lymph nodes, bile duct, and adjacent organs compared with cholecystectomy alone in the adult patient with gallbladder cancer in early and late stages implies improved survival.

METHODS

In April 2015 and updated in June 2016, a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. The certainty of evidence was evaluated according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four observational studies (non-randomised, controlled studies) and seven case series were included. Radical resection, including liver and lymph node resection, compared with cholecystectomy alone showed significantly better survival for patients with stages T1b and above. All studies had serious study limitations and the certainty of evidence was very low (GRADE ⊕○○○). A survival benefit seen in patients with stage T1b or higher with lymph node resection, was most evident in stage T2, but the certainty of evidence was low (GRADE ⊕⊕○○). It is uncertain whether routine bile duct resections improve overall survival in patients with gallbladder cancer stage T2-T4 (GRADE ⊕○○○).

CONCLUSION

Data indicate that prognosis can be improved if liver resection and lymph node resection is performed in patients with tumour stage T1b or higher. There is no evidence supporting resection of the bile duct or adjacent organs if it is not necessary in order to achieve radicality.