Ibrutinib in combination with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: phase III RESOLVE study.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) includes nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine. Ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, exhibits antitumor activity through tumor microenvironment modulation. The safety and efficacy of first-line ibrutinib plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine treatment in patients with PDAC were evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RESOLVE (NCT02436668) was a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (histologically-confirmed PDAC; stage IV diagnosis ≥6 weeks of randomization; Karnofsky performance score ≥70) were randomized to once-daily oral ibrutinib (560 mg) or placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); overall response rate and safety were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 424 patients were randomized (ibrutinib arm, n = 211; placebo arm, n = 213). Baseline characteristics were balanced across arms. After a median follow-up of 25 months, there was no significant difference in OS between ibrutinib plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine versus placebo plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (median of 9.7 versus 10.8 months; P = 0.3225). PFS was shorter for ibrutinib plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine compared with placebo plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (median 5.3 versus 6.0 months; P < 0.0001). Overall response rates were 29% and 42%, respectively (P = 0.0058). Patients in the ibrutinib arm had less time on treatment and received lower cumulative doses for all agents compared with the placebo arm. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events for ibrutinib versus placebo arms included neutropenia (24% versus 35%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (17% versus 8%), and anemia (16% versus 17%). Primary reasons for any treatment discontinuation were disease progression and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ibrutinib plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine did not improve OS or PFS for patients with PDAC. Safety was consistent with known profiles for these agents.

Health-related quality of life in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving maintenance olaparib.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer often have a detriment in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In the randomized, double-blind, phase III POLO trial progression-free survival was significantly longer with maintenance olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, than placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutation (gBRCAm) and metastatic pancreatic cancer whose disease had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. The prespecified HRQoL evaluation is reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive maintenance olaparib (300 mg b.i.d.; tablets) or placebo. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item module at baseline, every 4 weeks until disease progression, at discontinuation, and 30 days after last dose. Scores ranged from 0 to 100; a ≥10-point change or difference between arms was considered clinically meaningful. Adjusted mean change from baseline was analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Time to sustained clinically meaningful deterioration (TSCMD) was analysed using a log-rank test. RESULTS: Of 154 randomized patients, 89 of 92 olaparib-arm and 58 of 62 placebo-arm patients were included in HRQoL analyses. The adjusted mean change in Global Health Status (GHS) score from baseline was <10 points in both arms and there was no significant between-group difference [-2.47; 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.27, 2.33; P = 0.31]. Analysis of physical functioning scores showed a significant between-group difference (-4.45 points; 95% CI -8.75, -0.16; P = 0.04). There was no difference in TSCMD for olaparib versus placebo for GHS [P = 0.25; hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; 95% CI 0.41, 1.27] or physical functioning (P = 0.32; HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.73, 2.63). CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL was preserved with maintenance olaparib treatment with no clinically meaningful difference compared with placebo. These results support the observed efficacy benefit of maintenance olaparib in patients with a gBRCAm and metastatic pancreatic cancer. CLINCALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT02184195.

Concordance of blood- and tumor-based detection of RAS mutations to guide anti-EGFR therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a potential source for tumor genome analysis. We explored the concordance between the mutational status of RAS in tumor tissue and ctDNA in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients to establish eligibility for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective-retrospective cohort study was carried out. Tumor tissue from 146 mCRC patients was tested for RAS status with standard of care (SoC) PCR techniques, and Digital PCR (BEAMing) was used both in plasma and tumor tissue. RESULTS: ctDNA BEAMing RAS testing showed 89.7% agreement with SoC (Kappa index 0.80; 95% CI 0.71 - 0.90) and BEAMing in tissue showed 90.9% agreement with SoC (Kappa index 0.83; 95% CI 0.74 - 0.92). Fifteen cases (10.3%) showed discordant tissue-plasma results. ctDNA analysis identified nine cases of low frequency RAS mutations that were not detected in tissue, possibly due to technical sensitivity or heterogeneity. In six cases, RAS mutations were not detected in plasma, potentially explained by low tumor burden or ctDNA shedding. Prediction of treatment benefit in patients receiving anti-EGFR plus irinotecan in second- or third-line was equivalent if tested with SoC PCR and ctDNA. Forty-eight percent of the patients showed mutant allele fractions in plasma below 1%. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma RAS determination showed high overall agreement and captured a mCRC population responsive to anti-EGFR therapy with the same predictive level as SoC tissue testing. The feasibility and practicality of ctDNA analysis may translate into an alternative tool for anti-EGFR treatment selection.

Phase I study of FOLFIRI plus pimasertib as second-line treatment for KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway has been implicated in the molecular pathogenesis of human cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This provides a rationale for the development of MAPK-targeted agents such as pimasertib. METHODS: Patients with KRAS mutant mCRC were treated in the second-line setting with FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil/folinic acid/irinotecan) plus pimasertib. The primary objective of the safety run-in phase was to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended phase II dose of pimasertib combined with FOLFIRI. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled in the trial. Ten and six patients were treated daily with 45 and 60 mg of pimasertib plus FOLFIRI, respectively. The MTD was considered to be 45 mg per day. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting, asthenia and skin/rash event. Of the 15 patients in the efficacy analysis group, two patients had partial response, nine patients had stable disease, three patients had progressive disease as their best overall response and one patient could not be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation of pimasertib in combination with FOLFIRI was limited by toxicity. At the MTD of 45 mg per day, pimasertib was adequately tolerated in patients with mCRC and no unexpected or new safety signals or concerns were identified.

Global, multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of gemcitabine and gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 in patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated AGS-1C4D4, a fully human monoclonal antibody to prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), with gemcitabine in a randomized, phase II study of metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0/1 and previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 1:2 to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly seven times, 1 week rest, weekly three times q4weeks) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (48 mg/kg loading dose, then 24 mg/kg q3weeks IV). The primary end point was 6-month survival rate (SR). Archived tumor samples were collected for pre-planned analyses by PSCA expression. RESULTS: Between April 2009 and May 2010, 196 patients were randomly assigned to gemcitabine (n = 63) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (n = 133). The 6-month SR was 44.4% (95% CI, 31.9-57.5) in the gemcitabine arm and 60.9% (95% CI, 52.1-69.2) in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm (P = 0.03), while the median survival was 5.5 versus 7.6 months and the response rate was 13.1% versus 21.6% in the two arms, respectively. The 6-month SR was 57.1% in the gemcitabine arm versus 79.5% in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm among the PSCA-positive subgroup and 31.6% versus 46.2% among the PSCA-negative subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized, phase II study achieved its primary end point, demonstrating an improved 6-month SR with addition of AGS-1C4D4 to gemcitabine among patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00902291.

The management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Current expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 24th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2022.

This article summarises expert discussion on the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which took place during the 24th World Gastrointestinal Cancer Congress (WGICC) in Barcelona, July 2022. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory to ensure an optimal diagnosis and staging of HCC, planning of curative and therapeutic options, including surgical, embolisation, ablative strategies, or systemic therapy. Furthermore, in many patients with HCC, underlying liver cirrhosis represents a challenge and influences the therapeutic options.

Clinical nutrition as part of the treatment pathway of pancreatic cancer patients: an expert consensus.

PURPOSE: Malnutrition is a common problem among pancreatic cancer (PC) patients that negatively impacts on their quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes. The main objective of this consensus is to address the role of Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) into the comprehensive therapeutic management of PC patients. METHODS: A Spanish multidisciplinary group of specialists from the areas of Medical Oncology; Radiation Oncology; Endocrinology and Nutrition; and General Surgery agreed to assess the role of MNT as part of the best therapeutic management of PC patients. RESULTS: The panel established different recommendations focused on nutritional screening and nutritional screening tools, MNT strategies according to PC status, and MNT in palliative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is an unmet need to integrate nutritional therapy as a crucial part of the multimodal care process in PC patients. Health authorities, health care professionals, cancer patients, and their families should be aware of the relevance of nutritional status and MNT on clinical outcomes and QoL of PC patients.

Advances in the systemic treatment of therapeutic approaches in biliary tract cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are a rare and heterogenous group with an increasing incidence and high mortality rate. The estimated new cases and deaths of BTC worldwide are increasing, but the incidence and mortality rates in South East Asia are the highest worldwide, representing a real public health problem in these regions. BTC has a poor prognosis with a median overall survival <12 months. Thus, an urgent unmet clinical need for BTC patients exists and must be addressed. RESULTS: The backbone treatment of these malignancies is chemotherapy in first- and second-line setting, but in the last decade a rich molecular landscape has been discovered, expanding conceivable treatment options. Some druggable molecular aberrations can be treated with new targeted therapies and have already demonstrated efficacy in patients with BTC, improving clinical outcomes, such as the FGFR2 or IDH1 inhibitors. Many other molecular alterations are being discovered and the treatment of BTC will change in the near future from our current clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: In this review we discuss the epidemiology, molecular characteristics, present treatment approaches, review the recent therapeutic advances, and explore future directions for patients with BTC. Due to the rich molecular landscape of BTC, molecular profiling should be carried out early. Ongoing research will bring new targeted treatments and immunotherapy in the near future.

Applicability and results of liver transplant combined with neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy in the treatment of unresectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma. / Aplicabilidad y resultados del trasplante hepático combinado con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante en el tratamiento del colangiocarcinoma perihiliar irresecable.

BACKGROUND: In 2007, a multicenter protocol was developed in Catalonia, Spain, combining neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and liver transplantation (LT) for those patients with unresectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (hCCA). AIM: To analyse the effectiveness of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and LT for those patients enrolled in the protocol based on intention-to-treat. METHODS: Observational multicenter study which includes patients ≤ 68 years-old diagnosed with unresectable, solitary tumors ≤ 3 cm in radial diameter, without evidence of lymph node metastases. The protocol was based on a strategy of neoadjuvant therapy with high-dose radiation (45 Gy in total) plus intravenous fluorouracil (5-FU) given as a daily bolus for the first 3 days of radiation follow by oral capecitabine until transplantation. The patient was included in waiting list for LT if no evidence of disseminated disease was found. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2018, 13 patients were enrolled in the transplant protocol. Of those, 61% (8/13) of the patients were transplanted. The average time spent on the waiting list was 122 days (range 5-192). Intent-to-treat survival was 69% and 39% at one and 5 years. Post-transplantation overall survival was 87% and 62% and 29% recurrence rate at 5 years. CONCLUSION: The suitability of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and LT protocol was 61% in our series with long-term overall survival and should be considered as an alternative to resection for patients with localized node-negative hCCA.

Cetuximab administered once every second week to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a two-part pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic phase I dose-escalation study.

BACKGROUND: This phase I dose-escalation study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose of cetuximab administered on an every-second-week schedule to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, on the basis of safety, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised two parts: a 6-week cetuximab monotherapy dose-escalation phase and a subsequent combination therapy phase, during which patients received cetuximab, at the same dose/schedule as in the monotherapy phase, followed by irinotecan plus infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (FOLFIRI). Patients in the control group received cetuximab as a 400 mg/m(2) initial dose, then 250 mg/m(2)/week and in the dose-escalation group, at 400-700 mg/m(2), every second week. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included in the study. The MTD of cetuximab administered on an every-second-week schedule was not reached. The safety profiles were similar across all groups. Response rates in the cetuximab monotherapy and combination therapy phases were 15% and 42%, respectively. Trough levels for the 500, 600 mg/m(2) and standard weekly regimens were comparable. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab can be safely administered once every second week at doses between 400 and 700 mg/m(2), with 500 mg/m(2) being the most convenient and feasible dose for future studies.

Management and supportive treatment of frail patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Data regarding management of frail patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma practice is currently very scarce. Randomized clinical trials usually exclude these subgroup of patients and the majority of the publications only consider chronological age and ECOG performance status for their classification. Therefore, the current available data do not reflect daily clinical practice. Only data from a phase two study (FRAGANCE study), designed to select a tolerable dose-schedule of nab-placitaxel + gemcitabine (Phase one) and to evaluate the efficacy of the selected regimen (Phase two) in patients with ECOG-2 and previously untreated advanced PDAC, are currently available. Management of these particular patients is exceedingly complex and requires collaboration of multidisciplinary teams and intensive support treatment. This article reviews the literature available regarding the management of the so-called frail patients and provide guidance for chemotherapy as well as supportive care treatments.

Cetuximab efficacy and safety in a retrospective cohort of elderly patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available from clinical trials for elderly patients receiving cetuximab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The clinical data of consecutive patients aged > or =70 years given cetuximab for metastatic CRC were retrospectively captured from hospital pharmacy registries in seven centers. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients received cetuximab+/-with irinotecan. Median age was 76 years (70-84), 86% of patients were pretreated with fluoropyrimidines, irinotecan and oxaliplatin and 69.6% had documented resistance to irinotecan. Objective response rate was 21% (95% CI: 11-32%). The median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI: 3.0-5.7 months) and the median overall survival was 16.0 months (95% CI: 13.5-18.5 months). Skin rash occurred in 75% of the patients (11% grade 3) and diarrhea in 80% (20% grades 3-4). CONCLUSION: Tolerability of cetuximab was acceptable in elderly patients with pretreated metastatic CRC. Efficacy appeared similar to that observed in younger patients.

Management of hyperbilirubinaemia in pancreatic cancer patients.

Development of hyperbilirubinaemia is common in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, both at diagnosis as well throughout disease evolution. For this reason, hyperbilirubinaemia determines chemotherapy treatment selection, and therefore it should be considered one of the most relevant conditions. There is very little evidence for the use of chemotherapy in this setting. This article summarises the main causes of hyperbilirubinaemia, how to treat them as well as their differential diagnosis. The current clinical evidence of the available drugs as well as the recommendations of use different combinations in the context of hyperbilirubinaemia are also reviewed.

Adjuvant treatment for pancreatic ductal carcinoma.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a tumor with a very poor prognosis. Most of the patients are diagnosed in advanced stages of the disease, and 5-year survival rates in these patients remains <10%. Surgery still remains the only radical treatment option, although only 15-20% of patients are candidates for surgical resection at the time of the diagnosis. Patients who undergo radical surgery still have a limited survival rate, being the average of 23 months. Three clinical trials have shown that adjuvant chemotherapy therapy after surgery may improve survival: CONKO-1, ESPAC-3, and ESPAC-4. Adjuvant therapy is recommended in patients with R0/R1, T1-4/N1-0 tumors and with ECOG 0-1. In patients with ECOG-2, the decision needs to be individualized. Treatment schemes that have demonstrated efficacy include gemcitabine alone, 5-fluorouracil, or the combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine for six months. Prior to adjuvant treatment, the following test are recommended: Complete blood tests, including CA19.9 biomarker; imaging studies to rule out early disease relapse (preferable thorax-abdomen-pelvic CT). Studies that have evaluated the efficacy of radiation therapy in the adjuvant setting have presented conflicting results. Its use should be considered in patients with R1 or R2 tumors or in those with lymph nodes involved.

Clinical nutrition as part of the treatment pathway of pancreatic cancer patients: an expert consensus

PurposeMalnutrition is a common problem among pancreatic cancer (PC) patients that negatively impacts on their quality of life (QoL) and clinical outcomes. The main objective of this consensus is to address the role of Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) into the comprehensive therapeutic management of PC patients.MethodsA Spanish multidisciplinary group of specialists from the areas of Medical Oncology; Radiation Oncology; Endocrinology and Nutrition; and General Surgery agreed to assess the role of MNT as part of the best therapeutic management of PC patients.ResultsThe panel established different recommendations focused on nutritional screening and nutritional screening tools, MNT strategies according to PC status, and MNT in palliative treatment.ConclusionsThere is an unmet need to integrate nutritional therapy as a crucial part of the multimodal care process in PC patients. Health authorities, health care professionals, cancer patients, and their families should be aware of the relevance of nutritional status and MNT on clinical outcomes and QoL of PC patients.

Pancreatic cancer heterogeneity and response to Mek inhibition.

Our increasing knowledge of the mechanisms behind the progression of pancreatic cancer (PC) has not yet translated into effective treatments. Many promising drugs have failed in the clinic, highlighting the need for better preclinical models to assess drug efficacy and characterize mechanisms of resistance. Using different experimental models, including patient-derived xenografts (PDXs), we gauged the efficacy of therapies aimed at two hallmark lesions of PCs: activation of signaling pathways by oncogenic KRAS and inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes. Although the drug targeting inactivation of tumor suppressors by DNA methylation had little effect, the inhibition of Mek, a K-Ras effector, in combination with the standard of care (chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel), reduced the growth of three out of five PC-PDXs and impaired metastasis. The two least responding PC-PDXs were composed of genetically diverse cells, which displayed sensitivities to the Mek inhibitor differing by >10-fold. Unexpectedly, our analysis of this genetic diversity unveiled different KRAS mutations. As mutation in KRAS occurs early during progression, this heterogeneity may reflect the simultaneous appearance of different malignant cellular clones or, alternatively, that cells containing two mutations of KRAS are selected during tumor evolution. In vitro and in vivo analyses indicated that the intratumoral heterogeneity, along with the selective pressure imposed by the Mek inhibitor, resulted in rapid selection of resistant cells. Together with the gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel backbone, Mek inhibition could be effective in treatment of PC. However, resistance because of intratumoral heterogeneity is likely to develop frequently, pointing to the necessity of identifying the factors and mechanisms of resistance to further develop this therapy.

Consensus guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with pancreatic cancer in Spain.

The management of patients with pancreatic cancer has advanced over the last few years. We convey a multidisciplinary group of experts in an attempt to stablish practical guidelines for the diagnoses, staging and management of these patients. This paper summarizes the main conclusions of the working group. Patients with suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be rapidly evaluated and referred to high-volume centers. Multidisciplinary supervision is critical for proper diagnoses, staging and to frame a treatment plan. Surgical resection together with chemotherapy offers the highest chance for cure in early stage disease. Patients with advanced disease should be classified in treatment groups to guide systemic treatment. New chemotherapeutic regimens have resulted in improved survival. Symptomatic management is critical in this disease. Enrollment in a clinical trial is, in general, recommended.

SEOM Clinical Guideline for the treatment of pancreatic cancer (2016).

Pancreatic cancer remains an aggressive disease with a 5 year survival rate of 5%. Only 15% of patients with pancreatic cancer are eligible for radical surgery. Evidence suggests a benefit on survival with adjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine o fluourouracil) after R1/R0 resection. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is also a valid option in patients with positive margins. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as the involvement of the mesenteric vasculature with a limited extension. These tumors are technically resectable, but with a high risk of positive margins. Neoadjuvant treatment represents the best option for achieving an R0 resection. In advanced disease, two new chemotherapy treatment schemes (Folfirinox or Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel) have showed improvements in overall survival compared with gemcitabine alone. Progress in pancreatic cancer treatment will require a better knowledge of the molecular biology of this disease, focusing on personalized cancer therapies in the near future.

Aplicabilidad y resultados del trasplante hepático combinado con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante en el tratamiento del colangiocarcinoma perihiliar irresecable / Applicability and results of liver transplant combined with neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy in the treatment of unresectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Introducción: En 2007 se consensuó un protocolo asistencial entre los tres centros de trasplante hepático (TH) de Cataluña, que contemplaba el trasplante hepático (TH) asociado a quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante como tratamiento del colangiocarcinoma perihiliar (CCAp) irresecable. Objetivo: Analizar la aplicabilidad del TH en los pacientes con CCAp incluidos en el protocolo y la supervivencia por intención de tratamiento. Métodos: Estudio observacional multicéntrico que incluye a pacientes de edad ≤ 68 años, diagnosticados de CCAp ≤3 cm (diámetro radial), irresecable, sin afectación ganglionar o metástasis a distancia. Los pacientes recibieron tratamiento neoadyuvante basado en radioterapia externa en una dosis total de 45 Gy, asociado con bolos de 5-fluoracilo durante los tres primeros días de irradiación y posteriormente capecitabina oral. Aquellos en los que no se objetivó signos de progresión se incluyeron en la lista de espera para TH. Resultados: Entre 2007 y 2018, 13 pacientes fueron incluidos en dicho protocolo. Ocho de los 13 pacientes (61%) fueron trasplantados tras un tiempo en lista de espera de 122 días (rango 5-192). La supervivencia por intención de tratamiento a 1 y 5 años fue del 69 y 39%. La supervivencia global post-TH a 1 y 5 años fue del 87 y 62%, con una probabilidad de recidiva del 29% a los cinco años post-TH. Conclusión: La aplicabilidad del trasplante hepático combinado con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante ha sido del 61% en nuestra serie y debe ser considerado como un tratamiento potencialmente curativo para pacientes seleccionados con CCAp irresecable y sin enfermedad metastásica. (AU)

Background: In 2007, a multicenter protocol was developed in Catalonia, Spain, combining neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and liver transplantation (LT) for those patients with unresectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (hCCA). Aim: To analyse the effectiveness of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and LT for those patients enrolled in the protocol based on intention-to-treat. Methods: Observational multicenter study which includes patients ≤ 68 years-old diagnosed with unresectable, solitary tumors ≤ 3 cm in radial diameter, without evidence of lymph node metastases. The protocol was based on a strategy of neoadjuvant therapy with high-dose radiation (45 Gy in total) plus intravenous fluorouracil (5-FU) given as a daily bolus for the first 3 days of radiation follow by oral capecitabine until transplantation. The patient was included in waiting list for LT if no evidence of disseminated disease was found. Results: Between 2007 and 2018, 13 patients were enrolled in the transplant protocol. Of those, 61% (8/13) of the patients were transplanted. The average time spent on the waiting list was 122 days (range 5-192). Intent-to-treat survival was 69% and 39% at one and 5 years. Post-transplantation overall survival was 87% and 62% and 29% recurrence rate at 5 years. Conclusion: The suitability of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and LT protocol was 61% in our series with long-term overall survival and should be considered as an alternative to resection for patients with localized node-negative hCCA. (AU)

Biliary tract cancers: SEOM clinical guidelines.

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is an uncommon and highly fatal malignancy. It is composed of three main different entities; Gall bladder carcinoma (GBC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCC) sharing different genetic, risk factors and clinical presentation. Multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography (MRCP) are the more important diagnostic techniques. Surgery is the only potentially curative therapy but disease recurrence is frequent. Treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both has not demonstrated survival benefit in the adjuvant setting. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine constitutes the gold standard in metastatic disease. New ongoing studies mainly in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting along with molecular research will hopefully help to improve survival and quality of life of this disease.