@article{JGO12746,
author = {Mark K. Doherty and Mairéad G. McNamara and Priya Aneja and Emma McInerney and Stephanie Moignard and Anne M. Horgan and Haiyan Jiang and Tony Panzarella and Raymond Jang and Neesha Dhani and David Hedley and Jennifer J. Knox},
title = {Long term responders to palliative chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer},
journal = {Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology},
volume = {8},
number = {2},
year = {2017},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: Patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) are often treated with palliative chemotherapy (PC). Standard PC since 2010 is a cisplatin/gemcitabine doublet, with median overall survival (OS) of 11.7 months from the ABC-02 trial. Prior to this, our institutional standard was gemcitabine and fluoropyrimidine. The ABC-02 study used 8 cycles of PC as standard with treatment stopped even in the absence of disease progression, but some patients may benefit from continuing PC longer than 8 cycles.
Methods: Patients treated with at least 2 cycles of PC for advanced BTC in Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 1987 and 2015 were included, and divided into 2 groups for analysis—long-term responders (LTR) who received 9 or more cycles, and controls (2–8 cycles). Data was collected on demographics, clinicopathological features, PC regimen, toxicities, and survival. The primary outcome measure was OS, with secondary analyses including progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity rates between groups.
Results: A total of 382 patients were identified, 123 who met the criteria for LTR and 259 who were included as controls. The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar, although more patients in the control group had gallbladder cancer or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma than LTR (P=0.024), and more patients in the LTR group were treated with combination chemotherapy regimens (93% vs. 82% in controls, P=0.003). The LTR patients had significantly longer PFS (median 13.3 vs. 4.1 months, P},
issn = {2219-679X}, url = {https://jgo.amegroups.org/article/view/12746}
}