| Literature DB >> 26421012 |
Rani Kanthan1, Jenna-Lynn Senger2, Shahid Ahmed3, Selliah Chandra Kanthan4.
Abstract
Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is an uncommon disease in the majority of the world despite being the most common and aggressive malignancy of the biliary tree. Early diagnosis is essential for improved prognosis; however, indolent and nonspecific clinical presentations with a paucity of pathognomonic/predictive radiological features often preclude accurate identification of GBC at an early stage. As such, GBC remains a highly lethal disease, with only 10% of all patients presenting at a stage amenable to surgical resection. Among this select population, continued improvements in survival during the 21st century are attributable to aggressive radical surgery with improved surgical techniques. This paper reviews the current available literature of the 21st century on PubMed and Medline to provide a detailed summary of the epidemiology and risk factors, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, radiology, pathology, management, and prognosis of GBC.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26421012 PMCID: PMC4569807 DOI: 10.1155/2015/967472
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oncol ISSN: 1687-8450 Impact factor: 4.375
Summary of the major genes implicated in gallbladder carcinogenesis as available in the published literature (2000–present).
| Gene | Expression in GBC | Tissues of comparison | Additional information | Reference(s) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oncogene | KRAS | Higher (10–67%) | Adenoma (0%) | Marker of GBC in PBM | [ |
| EGFR | Higher (63.4%) | Dysplasia (71.4%) | [ | ||
| HER-2/neu (ERBB2) | Higher (16–64%) | Carcinoma in situ (0%) | Marker of metastatic disease (70%) | [ | |
|
| |||||
| Tumor suppressor | TP53 | Higher (58.3–100%) | Adenoma (10–20%) | Unknown relation to prognosis | [ |
| P16 | Lower (48.8%) | Adenoma (100%) | Related to poorer prognosis | [ | |
| Fragile histidine triad (FHIT) | Lower | Normal | Early change in carcinogenesis | [ | |
| Retinoblastoma | Lower (58.5%) | Adenoma (100%) | Causes cell proliferation, apoptosis, and developmental defects | [ | |
| VHL | Lower (48.1%) | Peritumoral tissue (80.4%) | Marker progression, biological behavior, and prognosis | [ | |
|
| |||||
| Adhesion molecules and mucins | Cadherins | Higher (N-cadherin 55%; P-cadherin 53%) | None | Associated with large tumor size, invasion, and node metastases | [ |
| MUC1 | Higher (78%) | Normal tissue (absent) | Higher expression in more advanced tumours; poor survival | [ | |
| Erythrocyte complement receptor 1 (CR1) | Lower | Chronic cholecystitis | Role under investigation | [ | |
|
| |||||
| Angiogenesis | Thrombospondin-1 | Higher (74.5%) | Normal (0%) | Associated with venous involvement | [ |
| Cyclooxygenase-2 | Higher (59.2–71.9%) | Normal (0–25%) | Associated with poor prognosis, mean survival, and tumor progression | [ | |
| VEGF-A | Higher (81%) | Chronic cholecystitis (5.1%) | Expression related to histologic grade, TNM stage, and prognosis | [ | |
|
| |||||
| Cell cycle regulators | Cyclin E | Higher (33%) | Adenoma (12.5%) | [ | |
| Cyclin D1 | Higher (41–68.3%) | Adenoma (57.1–67%) | Marker of lymphatic/venous involvement and lymph node metastases | [ | |
| P27Kip1 | Lower (43–65%) | None | [ | ||
|
| |||||
| Apoptosis | Caspases | Higher (95%; caspase 3; 77%; caspases 6 and 8) | None | Higher extent apoptosis in grade II/III GBC compared with grade I/dysplasia |
[ |
| Bcl-2 | Higher (34.7%) | ||||
Nevin's staging.
| Stage | Definition |
|---|---|
| I | Tumour invades mucosa |
| II | Tumour invades mucosa + muscularis |
| III | Tumour invades mucosa + muscularis + subserosa |
| IV | Tumour invades all 3 layers of gallbladder + cystic lymph node |
| V | Tumour extends into liver bed or metastases |
Japanese Biliary Surgical Society staging system.
| Stage | I | II | III | IV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capsular invasion | No capsular invasion ( | Suspected capsular invasion ( | Marked capsular invasion ( | Direct invasion of adjacent viscera ( |
|
| ||||
| Hepatic invasion | No hepatic invasion ( | Suspected hepatic invasion ( | Marked hepatic invasion around gallbladder ( | Extensive hepatic invasion ( |
|
| ||||
| Bile duct invasion | No involvement of extrahepatic bile duct ( | Suspected involvement of bile duct ( | Marked biliary involvement ( | Extensive involvement of bile duct ( |
|
| ||||
| Lymph node metastases | No lymph node metastasis ( | Metastases to lymph nodes around extrahepatic bile duct (primary group, | Metastases in lymph nodes of hepatoduodenal ligament (secondary group, | Metastases more distant than in stage III (fourth group, |
|
| ||||
| Liver metastasis | No liver metastases ( | No liver metastases ( | No liver metastases ( | Liver metastases in 1 lobe ( |
|
| ||||
| Peritoneal dissemination | No peritoneal dissemination ( | No peritoneal dissemination ( | No peritoneal dissemination ( | Peritoneal dissemination near tumour ( |
TNM staging.
| Stage | T-stage | N-stage | M-stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Tis | N0 | M0 |
| I | T1 | N0 | M0 |
| II | T2 | N0 | M0 |
| IIIA | T3 | N0 | M0 |
| IIIB | T1, T2, T3 | N1 | M0 |
| IVA | T4 | N0, N1 | M0 |
| IVB | Any T | Any N | M1 |
| Any T | N2 | M0 |
Primary Tumour (T): Tis Carcinoma in situ; T1 Tumour invades lamina propria (a) or muscular layer (b); T2 Tumour invades perimuscular connective tissue; T3 Tumour perforates serosa and/or invades liver and/or other adjacent organs (stomach, duodenum, colon, pancreas, and extrahepatic bile ducts); T4 Tumour invades main porta vein or hepatic artery or multiple extrahepatic organs.
Regional Lymph Nodes (N): N0 No regional lymph node metastasis; N1 Metastases to nodes along cystic duct, common bile duct, hepatic artery, and/or portal vein; N2 Metastases to periaortic, pericaval, superior mesenteric artery, and/or celiac artery nodes.
Distant Metastasis (M): M0 No distant metastasis; M1 Distant metastasis.
Figure 1Role of systemic therapy in the management of gallbladder cancer.
Results of three phase 2 trials which exclusively evaluated efficacy of chemotherapy in patients with advanced gall bladder cancer.
| Regimen | Number of patients | Response rate (%) | Median overall survival |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemcitabine monotherapy [ | 26 | 36 | 30 weeks |
| Gemcitabine and cisplatin [ | 30 | 37 | 20 weeks |
| Gemcitabine and cisplatin [ | 42 | 48 | 7 months |
Modified from [2].
Efficacy of gemcitabine combination therapy in patients with advanced gallbladder and biliary tract cancer.
| Regimens | Number of patients | Response rate (%) | Median overall survival (months) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemcitabine and cisplatin | |||
| Meyerhardt et al. [ | 33 | 21 | 9.7 |
| Thongprasert et al. [ | 40 | 26 | 8.4 |
| Lee et al. [ | 24 | 21 | 9.3 |
| Kim et al. [ | 29 | 35 | 11 |
| Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin | |||
| Harder et al. [ | 31 | 26 | 11 |
| André et al. [ | 33 | 36 | 15.4 |
| Gebbia et al. [ | 24 | 50 | 14 |
| Gemcitabine an capecitabine | |||
| Knox et al. [ | 45 | 31 | 14 |
| Cho et al. [ | 44 | 32 | 14 |
| Riechelmann et al. [ | 75 | 29 | 12.7 |
| Iyer et al. [ | 12 | 17 | 14 |
Patients with good performance status; patients with poor performance status. Modified from [2].
Targeted therapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy in gallbladder and biliary tract cancer.
| Targeted agent | Disease site | Number | Line of therapy | Response rate | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single agent targeting VGF | |||||
| Sorafenib [ | BTC | 12/31 | First | 6% | |
| Sunitinib [ | BTC | NA/56 | Second | 9% | |
| Single agent targeting HER2 | |||||
| Lapatinib [ | HCC or BTC | 17 BTC/57 | First & second | 0% in BTC | |
| Lapatinib [ | HCC or BTC | NA/9 | Any | 0% | Trial was stopped early due to futility |
| Other single agents | |||||
| Bortezomib [ | BTC | 6/20 | First, second, third | 5% | Trial was stopped early due to futility |
| Selumetinib [ | BTC | 7/28 | Second | 10% | |
| Doublet of targeted agents | |||||
| Bevacizumab + erlotinib [ | BTC | 10/53 | First | 17% | |
| Bevacizumab + erlotinib [ | Upper GI cancer | 16 BTC/102 | Second or later | 6% | |
| Targeted agents with chemotherapy | |||||
| GEMOX ± cetuximab [ | BTC | NA/50 | First | 23% | Response rate in control group: 29% |
| GEMOX + cetuximab [ | BTC | NA/30 | First | 63% | 9 patients underwent resection after response |
| GEMOX ± cetuximab [ | BTC | 50/122 | First | 27.3% | Response rate in control group: 15% |
| GEMOX + bevacizumab [ | BTC | NA/35 | First & second | 40% | |
| Gem + triapine [ | BTC | 18/33 | First | 9% | |
| 5FU/LV + imatinib [ | BTC | 19/41 | First | 8% | |
| GEMOX + erlotinib [ | BTC | 82/268 | First | 30% | 16% in chemotherapy arm alone. No difference in OS |
BTC, biliary tract cancer; GEMOX, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin; HCC, hepatocellular cancer; NA, not applicable; OS, overall survival. Modified from [143].