Anant Ramaswamy1, Vikas Ostwal2, Nikhil Pande1, Arvind Sahu1, Sunny Jandyal1, Mukta Ramadwar3, Nitin Shetty4, Shraddha Patkar5, Mahesh Goel5, Sudeep Gupta1. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, TMH, E. Borges Road, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, TMH, E. Borges Road, Parel, Mumbai, 400012, India. dr.vikas.ostwal@gmail.com. 3. Department of Pathology, TMH, Mumbai, 400012, India. 4. Department of Interventional Radiology, TMH, Mumbai, 400012, India. 5. Department of Surgical Oncology, TMH, Mumbai, 400012, India.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Gall bladder cancer (GBC) has high prevalence in the Indo-Gangetic belt in India. While the first-line chemotherapy (CT1) has been established as gemcitabine-platinum doublet in advanced GBC, there is no standard recommendation or guidelines regarding feasibility of second-line therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who received second-line of chemotherapy (CT2) at our institution from July 2012 to December 2014. Patient records were examined for efficacy and toxicity of administered CT2, along with response rates (RR) and survival. Potential prognostic factors were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients received CT2 in the predefined period. Ninety-nine percent of patients had received a gemcitabine-based regimen as CT1 with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5 months before CT2. 51.7 % patients had undergone surgery prior with 5.7 % patients having received radiotherapy previously. Prior to beginning CT2, PS was 0/1 in 67.8 % patients, albumin was >4 g% in 40.2 % and CA 19.9 was raised in a majority (66.7 %) patients, respectively. As per institution protocol, a majority of patients (89.6 %) were administered CAP-IRI regimen. Overall RR and disease control rates (DCR) were 21.8 % and 41.3 %, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6 and 8 months, with no significant differences between CAP-IRI and other regimens. Adverse effects were tolerable, with dose reduced upfront in 23 % patients and 11.5 % patients during subsequent cycles of CT. ECOG Performance Status (PS) of 0/1 was a significant prognostic variable for OS on multivariate analysis (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: CAP-IRI is a well-tolerated second-line chemotherapeutic regimen in patients with advanced GBC. Careful selection of patients is required when administering second-line chemotherapy to advanced GBC patients, with particular emphasis on ECOG PS.
INTRODUCTION: Gall bladder cancer (GBC) has high prevalence in the Indo-Gangetic belt in India. While the first-line chemotherapy (CT1) has been established as gemcitabine-platinum doublet in advanced GBC, there is no standard recommendation or guidelines regarding feasibility of second-line therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who received second-line of chemotherapy (CT2) at our institution from July 2012 to December 2014. Patient records were examined for efficacy and toxicity of administered CT2, along with response rates (RR) and survival. Potential prognostic factors were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients received CT2 in the predefined period. Ninety-nine percent of patients had received a gemcitabine-based regimen as CT1 with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5 months before CT2. 51.7 % patients had undergone surgery prior with 5.7 % patients having received radiotherapy previously. Prior to beginning CT2, PS was 0/1 in 67.8 % patients, albumin was >4 g% in 40.2 % and CA 19.9 was raised in a majority (66.7 %) patients, respectively. As per institution protocol, a majority of patients (89.6 %) were administered CAP-IRI regimen. Overall RR and disease control rates (DCR) were 21.8 % and 41.3 %, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6 and 8 months, with no significant differences between CAP-IRI and other regimens. Adverse effects were tolerable, with dose reduced upfront in 23 % patients and 11.5 % patients during subsequent cycles of CT. ECOG Performance Status (PS) of 0/1 was a significant prognostic variable for OS on multivariate analysis (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: CAP-IRI is a well-tolerated second-line chemotherapeutic regimen in patients with advanced GBC. Careful selection of patients is required when administering second-line chemotherapy to advanced GBC patients, with particular emphasis on ECOG PS.
Entities:
Keywords:
CAP-IRI; Gall bladder cancer; Second-line chemotherapy
Authors: Juan Valle; Harpreet Wasan; Daniel H Palmer; David Cunningham; Alan Anthoney; Anthony Maraveyas; Srinivasan Madhusudan; Tim Iveson; Sharon Hughes; Stephen P Pereira; Michael Roughton; John Bridgewater Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William R Jarnagin; Leyo Ruo; Sarah A Little; David Klimstra; Michael D'Angelica; Ronald P DeMatteo; Raquel Wagman; Leslie H Blumgart; Yuman Fong Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: T Okusaka; K Nakachi; A Fukutomi; N Mizuno; S Ohkawa; A Funakoshi; M Nagino; S Kondo; S Nagaoka; J Funai; M Koshiji; Y Nambu; J Furuse; M Miyazaki; Y Nimura Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-07-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: L Fornaro; S Cereda; G Aprile; S Di Girolamo; D Santini; N Silvestris; S Lonardi; F Leone; M Milella; C Vivaldi; C Belli; F Bergamo; S E Lutrino; R Filippi; M Russano; V Vaccaro; A E Brunetti; V Rotella; A Falcone; M A Barbera; J Corbelli; G Fasola; M Aglietta; V Zagonel; M Reni; E Vasile; G Brandi Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Florian Moik; Jakob M Riedl; Thomas Winder; Angelika Terbuch; Christopher H Rossmann; Joanna Szkandera; Thomas Bauernhofer; Anne-Katrin Kasparek; Renate Schaberl-Moser; Andreas Reicher; Felix Prinz; Martin Pichler; Herbert Stöger; Michael Stotz; Armin Gerger; Florian Posch Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-04-03 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Prabhat G Bhargava; Amit Kumar; Vijai Simha; Minit Shah; Shraddha Patkar; Mahesh Goel; Vikas Ostwal; Anant Ramaswamy Journal: South Asian J Cancer Date: 2021-06-12