Takahara Naminatsu, Isayama Hiroyuki, Nakai Yousuke, Sasaki Takashi, Ishigaki Kazunaga, Saito Kei, Akiyama Dai, Uchino Rie, Mizuno Suguru, Yagioka Hiroshi, Kogure Hirofumi, Togawa Osamu, Matsubara Saburo, Ito Yukiko, Toda Nobuo, Tada Minoru, Koike Kazuhiko
Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8655, Japan.
Department of Gastroenterology, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Invest New Drugs. 2017 Jun;35(3):269-276. doi: 10.1007/s10637-017-0430-7. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
Objective This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of the combination therapy of gemcitabine and S-1 (GS) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). Methods In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, a total of 212 patients with advanced BTC receiving GS (n = 125) or GC (n = 87) between July 2006 and August 2015 were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective tumor response, and safety. Results Patient characteristics were well balanced between the two groups, except for tumor size (the baseline sum of the largest diameter of the tumor: 6.3 cm in the GS group vs. 8.6 cm in the GC group, p = 0.01). Although the response rate was higher in the GS group than in the GC group (28.8% vs. 10.3%, p = 0.01), the median PFS and OS were comparable between the two groups (PFS of 5.6 vs. 7.6 months, p = 0.74; OS of 12.4 vs. 9.2 months, p = 0.20, respectively). Stomatitis and skin rash were more frequently observed in the GS group, whereas anemia, thrombocytopenia, nausea, and renal toxicity were more commonly observed in the GC group. Conclusion This study demonstrates that GS and GC are similar with regard to their safety and efficacy in patients with advanced BTC. GS could serve as an alternative treatment for advanced BTC as a first-line chemotherapy.
目的 本研究旨在比较吉西他滨与S-1联合治疗(GS)和吉西他滨与顺铂联合治疗(GC)在晚期胆管癌(BTC)患者中的安全性和疗效。方法 在这项多中心回顾性队列研究中,分析了2006年7月至2015年8月期间接受GS(n = 125)或GC(n = 87)治疗的212例晚期BTC患者。主要终点为总生存期(OS)。次要终点为无进展生存期(PFS)、客观肿瘤反应和安全性。结果 两组患者的特征除肿瘤大小外基本均衡(肿瘤最大直径基线总和:GS组为6.3 cm,GC组为8.6 cm,p = 0.01)。虽然GS组的缓解率高于GC组(28.8%对10.3%,p = 0.01),但两组的中位PFS和OS相当(PFS分别为5.6个月对7.6个月,p = 0.74;OS分别为12.4个月对9.2个月,p = 0.20)。GS组更常观察到口腔炎和皮疹,而GC组更常观察到贫血、血小板减少、恶心和肾毒性。结论 本研究表明,GS和GC在晚期BTC患者中的安全性和疗效相似。GS可作为晚期BTC一线化疗的替代治疗方法。