title: Chemotherapy for cholangiocarcinoma: An update.
abstract: Cholangiocarcinomas (bile duct cancers) are a heterogeneous group of malignancies arising from the epithelial cells of the intrahepatic, perihilar and extrahepatic bile ducts. Patients diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma must be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team and be treated with individualized management. First of all, it is very important to define the potential resectability of the tumor because surgery is the main therapeutic option for these patients. Overall, cholangiocarcinomas have a very poor prognosis. The 5-year survival rate is 5%-10%. In cases with a potentially curative surgery, 5-year survival rates of 25%-30% are reported. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the cure rate from surgery, exploring the survival benefit of any adjuvant strategy. It is difficult to clarify the role of adjuvant treatment in localized and locally advanced cholangiocarcinomas. There are limited data and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation in patients with resected biliary tract cancer is poorly defined. The most relevant studies in the adjuvant setting are one from Japan, the well known ESPAC-3 and BILCAP from the United Kingdom and a meta-analysis. We show the results of these trials. According to medical oncology guidelines, postoperative adjuvant therapy is widely recommended for all patients with intrahepatic or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma who have microscopically positive resection margins, as well as for those with a complete resection but node-positive disease. Clinical trials are ongoing. The locally advanced cholangiocarcinoma setting includes a heterogeneous mix of patients: (1) patients who have had surgery but with macroscopic residual disease; (2) patients with locally recurrent disease after potentially curative treatment; and (3) patients with locally unresectable disease at presentation. In these patients, surgery is not an option and chemoradiation therapy can prolong overall survival and provide control of symptoms due to local tumor effects. Nowadays, no neoadjuvant therapy can be considered a standard approach for the treatment of patients with cholangiocarcinoma. There are promising results and randomized trials are needed in patients with a metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. In systemic therapy, no single drug or combination has consistently increased median survival beyond the expected 8-12 mo. It is always recommended that patients enrol in clinical trials. Clinical trials have shown that the more standard chemotherapy for a first line regimen of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (or oxaliplatin as a potentially better tolerated agent) is superior to gemcitabine alone. Leucovorin-modulated 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine monotherapy or single agent gemcitabine are reasonable options for patients with a borderline performance status. After progression in patients with an adequate performance status, active regimens that could be considered include gemcitabine plus capecitabine, or erlotinib plus bevacizumab, for second line treatment.
authors.affiliation: Natalia Ramírez-Merino, Santiago Ponce Aix, Hernán Cortés-Funes, Department of Medical Oncology, Clinica La Luz, 28003 Madrid, Spain.
authors.forename: Natalia
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Ramírez-Merino
authors.forename: Santiago Ponce
authors.initials: SP
authors.lastname: Aix
authors.forename: Hernán
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Cortés-Funes
keywords: Chemotherapy; Cholangiocarcinoma; Gemcitabine; Oncology; Review
references.citation: World J Surg. 2003 Feb;27(2):173-9
references.pmid: 12616432
references.citation: Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007 Nov;37(11):843-51
references.pmid: 17942578
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jul 15;53(4):969-74
references.pmid: 12095564
references.citation: J Gastrointest Surg. 2009 Aug;13(8):1470-9
references.pmid: 19421824
references.citation: J Surg Oncol. 2007 Jul 1;96(1):8-13
references.pmid: 17516546
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994 Mar 1;28(4):945-51
references.pmid: 8138448
references.citation: Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2002 Oct;11(4):941-54
references.pmid: 12607581
references.citation: Arch Surg. 1993 Aug;128(8):871-7; discussion 877-9
references.pmid: 8393652
references.citation: JAMA. 2012 Jul 11;308(2):147-56
references.pmid: 22782416
references.citation: J Surg Oncol. 2008 Dec 1;98(7):485-9
references.pmid: 18802958
references.citation: Am J Surg. 1997 Dec;174(6):605-8; discussion 608-9
references.pmid: 9409582
references.citation: Ann Oncol. 2009 May;20 Suppl 4:46-8
references.pmid: 19454460
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 1;81(3):654-9
references.pmid: 20864265
references.citation: World J Surg. 2007 Jun;31(6):1256-63
references.pmid: 17453285
references.citation: J Gastrointest Surg. 2005 Dec;9(9):1191-204; discussion 1204-6
references.pmid: 16332474
references.citation: Ann Oncol. 1996 Aug;7(6):593-600
references.pmid: 8879373
references.citation: Radiother Oncol. 2010 Jan;94(1):47-52
references.pmid: 19963295
references.citation: Oncologist. 2008 Apr;13(4):415-23
references.pmid: 18448556
references.citation: Br J Cancer. 2007 Mar 26;96(6):896-902
references.pmid: 17325704
references.citation: J Gastrointest Cancer. 2012 Sep;43(3):396-404
references.pmid: 22328060
references.citation: Ann Surg. 2009 Dec;250(6):950-6
references.pmid: 19953713
references.citation: Cancer. 2002 Oct 15;95(8):1685-95
references.pmid: 12365016
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jun 1;30(16):1934-40
references.pmid: 22529261
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1999 Oct 28;341(18):1368-78
references.pmid: 10536130
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 May 1;68(1):178-82
references.pmid: 17276614
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Jan 1;73(1):148-53
references.pmid: 18805651
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2010 Apr 8;362(14):1273-81
references.pmid: 20375404
references.citation: Ann Surg. 2013 Jul;258(1):129-40
references.pmid: 23059502