4.7 Article

Gemcitabine alone or in combination with cisplatin in patients with biliary tract cancer: a comparative multicentre study in Japan

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 103, Issue 4, Pages 469-474

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605779

Keywords

combination chemotherapy; gemcitabine; cisplatin; biliary tract cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. Eli Lilly Japan K.K.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: A British randomised study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) combination showed promising results in biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients. In our study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of this combination compared with gemcitabine alone (G) in Japanese BTC patients. METHODS: Overall, 84 advanced BTC patients were randomised to either cisplatin 25 mg m(-2) plus gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 of a 21-day cycle (GC-arm), or single-agent gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle (G-arm). Treatments were repeated for at least 12 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred, up to a maximum of 48 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were included in the analysis. For the GC and G-arms, respectively, the 1-year survival rate was 39.0 vs 31.0%, median survival time 11.2 vs 7.7 months, median progression-free survival time 5.8 vs 3.7 months and overall response rate 19.5 vs 11.9%. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities (GC-arm/G-arm) were neutropenia (56.1%/38.1%), thrombocytopenia (39.0%/7.1%), leukopenia (29.3%/19.0%), haemoglobin decrease (36.6%/16.7%) and gamma-GTP increase (29.3%/35.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin combination therapy was found to be effective and well tolerated, suggesting that it could also be a standard regimen for Japanese patients. British Journal of Cancer (2010) 103, 469-474. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605779 www.bjcancer.com Published online 13 July 2010 (C) 2010 Cancer Research UK

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available