Ovie Utuama1,2, Jennifer B Permuth1,3, Getachew Dagne2, Aurora Sanchez-Anguiano2, Amy Alman2, Ambuj Kumar4, Jason Denbo1, Richard Kim1, Jason B Fleming1, Daniel A Anaya5. 1. Section of Hepatobiliary Tumors, Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 2. School of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 3. Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 4. USF Health Program for Comparative Effectiveness Research and Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 5. Section of Hepatobiliary Tumors, Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. daniel.anaya@moffitt.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Upfront surgery is the current standard for resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) despite high treatment failure with this approach. We sought to examine the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) as an alternative strategy for this population. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with resectable ICC undergoing curative-intent surgery (2006-2014). Utilization trends were examined and survival estimates between NAC and upfront surgery were compared; propensity score-matched models were used to examine the association of NAC with overall survival (OS) for all patients and risk-stratified cohorts. Models accounted for clustering within hospitals, and results represent findings from a complete-case analysis. RESULTS: Among 881 patients with ICC, 8.3% received NAC, with no changes over time (Cochran-Armitage p = 0.7). Median follow-up was 50.9 months, with no difference in unadjusted survival with NAC versus upfront surgery (median OS 51.8 vs. 35.6 months, and 5-year OS rates of 38.2% vs. 36.6%; log rank p = 0.51), and no survival benefit in the propensity score-matched analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.11; p = 0.16). However, for patients with stage II-III disease, NAC was associated with a trend towards improved survival (median OS of 47.6 months vs. 25.9 months, and 5-year OS rates of 34% vs. 25.7%; log-rank p = 0.10) and a statistically significant survival benefit in the propensity score-matched analysis. (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.91; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: NAC is associated with improved OS over upfront surgery in patients with resectable ICC and high-risk of treatment failure. These data support the need for prospective studies to examine NAC as an alternative strategy to improve OS in this population.
BACKGROUND: Upfront surgery is the current standard for resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) despite high treatment failure with this approach. We sought to examine the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) as an alternative strategy for this population. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with resectable ICC undergoing curative-intent surgery (2006-2014). Utilization trends were examined and survival estimates between NAC and upfront surgery were compared; propensity score-matched models were used to examine the association of NAC with overall survival (OS) for all patients and risk-stratified cohorts. Models accounted for clustering within hospitals, and results represent findings from a complete-case analysis. RESULTS: Among 881 patients with ICC, 8.3% received NAC, with no changes over time (Cochran-Armitage p = 0.7). Median follow-up was 50.9 months, with no difference in unadjusted survival with NAC versus upfront surgery (median OS 51.8 vs. 35.6 months, and 5-year OS rates of 38.2% vs. 36.6%; log rank p = 0.51), and no survival benefit in the propensity score-matched analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.11; p = 0.16). However, for patients with stage II-III disease, NAC was associated with a trend towards improved survival (median OS of 47.6 months vs. 25.9 months, and 5-year OS rates of 34% vs. 25.7%; log-rank p = 0.10) and a statistically significant survival benefit in the propensity score-matched analysis. (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.91; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: NAC is associated with improved OS over upfront surgery in patients with resectable ICC and high-risk of treatment failure. These data support the need for prospective studies to examine NAC as an alternative strategy to improve OS in this population.
Authors: Fabio Bagante; Gaya Spolverato; Matthew Weiss; Sorin Alexandrescu; Hugo P Marques; Luca Aldrighetti; Shishir K Maithel; Carlo Pulitano; Todd W Bauer; Feng Shen; George A Poultsides; Oliver Soubrane; Guillaume Martel; B Groot Koerkamp; Alfredo Guglielmi; Endo Itaru; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Liang-Shuo Hu; Xu-Feng Zhang; Matthew Weiss; Irinel Popescu; Hugo P Marques; Luca Aldrighetti; Shishir K Maithel; Carlo Pulitano; Todd W Bauer; Feng Shen; George A Poultsides; Oliver Soubrane; Guillaume Martel; B Groot Koerkamp; Endo Itaru; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-04-24 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Angela Lamarca; Paul Ross; Harpreet S Wasan; Richard A Hubner; Mairéad G McNamara; Andre Lopes; Prakash Manoharan; Daniel Palmer; John Bridgewater; Juan W Valle Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: John T Miura; Fabian M Johnston; Susan Tsai; Ben George; Jim Thomas; Dan Eastwood; Anjishnu Banerjee; Kathleen K Christians; Kiran K Turaga; Timothy M Pawlik; T Clark Gamblin Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Gaya Spolverato; Mohammad Y Yakoob; Yuhree Kim; Sorin Alexandrescu; Hugo P Marques; Jorge Lamelas; Luca Aldrighetti; T Clark Gamblin; Shishir K Maithel; Carlo Pulitano; Todd W Bauer; Feng Shen; George A Poultsides; J Wallis Marsh; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: A Blythe Ryerson; Christie R Eheman; Sean F Altekruse; John W Ward; Ahmedin Jemal; Recinda L Sherman; S Jane Henley; Deborah Holtzman; Andrew Lake; Anne-Michelle Noone; Robert N Anderson; Jiemin Ma; Kathleen N Ly; Kathleen A Cronin; Lynne Penberthy; Betsy A Kohler Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 6.860