4.4 Article

Single-institution experience with gemcitabine-cisplatin combination therapy as a second-line treatment for patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer after failure of gemcitabine-S-1 combination therapy: a prospective feasibility study

Journal

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 81, Issue 5, Pages 949-955

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00280-018-3566-z

Keywords

Biliary tract cancer; Gemcitabine; Cisplatin; S-1; Refractory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

NCCN and Japanese clinical guidelines for the treatment of biliary tract cancer (BTC) addressed gemcitabine-cisplatin combination (GC) as first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced BTC ineligible for surgery in 2013. However, gemcitabine-S1 combination therapy (GS) has been widely used as first-line treatment in Japan because Japanese social insurance coverage of S-1 for BTC was approved prior to that of cisplatin. To elucidate the efficacy and tolerability of GC as second-line chemotherapy for patients with unresectable BTC after failure of GS. Between September 2008 and August 2011, patients with unresectable BTC who provided informed consent and received GC comprising gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2) and cisplatin at 20 mg/m(2) given on days 1 and 8 in a 3-week cycle after failure of GS were included in the present study. Clinical data from these patients were collected prospectively. Primary endpoints were overall survival and time to progression (TTP). Secondary endpoints were response and tolerability. Twenty-seven patients were analyzed. Median survival time (MST) and TTP from the beginning of second-line treatment were 6.5 and 3.3 months, respectively, whereas MST from the commencement of first-line therapy was 12.06 months. One patient showed partial response, 16 had stable disease and 10 experienced disease progression. As a result, disease control rate was 63.0%. In total, 119 courses (median, 4; range, 1-15) were administered. Discontinuation of GC due to drug toxicities was not observed. Although some issues remain to be clarified, mainly due to the small sample size, this single-institution experience with GC as second-line treatment after failure of GS showed acceptable outcomes and good tolerability.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available