Suppr超能文献

可切除胆管癌的术后辅助化疗。

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable cholangiocarcinoma.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Sep 13;9(9):CD012814. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012814.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cholangiocarcinoma (cancer in the bile duct) is an aggressive tumour for which surgical resection is a mainstay of treatment. Despite complete resection, recurrences of the cancer are common and lead to poor prognosis in patients. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy given after surgical resection may reduce the risk of cancer recurrence by eradicating residual cancer and micrometastatic lesions. The benefits and harms of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy versus placebo, no intervention, or other adjuvant chemotherapies are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy versus placebo, no intervention, or other adjuvant chemotherapies for people with cholangiocarcinoma after curative-intent resection.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed electronic searches in the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science for trials that met the inclusion criteria up to 28 April 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, publication status, or language comparing postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy versus placebo, no intervention, or a different postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for participants with curative-intent resection for cholangiocarcinoma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods to develop and conduct the review. We conducted meta-analyses and presented results, where feasible, using a random-effects model and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed risk of bias according to predefined domains suggested by Cochrane. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach and presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five published randomised clinical trials. The trials included 931 adults (18 to 83 years old) who underwent curative-intent resection for cholangiocarcinoma. Four trials compared postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (mitomycin-C and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU); gemcitabine; gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin; or capecitabine) versus no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (surgery alone) in 867 participants with cholangiocarcinoma only. A fifth trial compared postoperative adjuvant S-1 (a novel oral fluoropyrimidine derivative) chemotherapy versus gemcitabine in 70 participants with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (64 participants), and gallbladder carcinoma (6 participants). We assessed all of the included trials at overall high risk of bias. One trial was conducted in France, three in Japan, and one in the United Kingdom. We could not perform all planned comparison analyses due to lack of data. Three trials used intention-to-treat analyses. Another trial used per-protocol analysis. In the remaining trial one participant in the intervention group and one in the control group were lost to follow-up. However, the outcomes of these two participants were not described. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy versus no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy We are very uncertain as to whether postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy has little to no effect on all-cause mortality versus no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.01; 4 trials, 867 participants, very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain of the effect of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on serious adverse events (RR 17.82, 95% CI 2.43 to 130.82; 1 trial, 219 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The trial indicated that postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy could increase serious adverse events, as 19/113 (20.5%) of participants developed an adverse event, compared to 1/106 (1.1%) of participants in the no-postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy group. None of the included trials reported data on health-related quality of life, cancer-related mortality, time to recurrence of the tumour, and non-serious adverse events in participants with only cholangiocarcinoma. Adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine derivative) versus adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy The only available trial analysed all participants with intrahepatic, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma together, with data on participants with cholangiocarcinoma not provided separately. The authors reported that one-year overall mortality after adjuvant S-1 therapy was lower than with adjuvant gemcitabine-based therapy following major hepatectomy for biliary tract cancer. There were no differences in two-year overall mortality.

FUNDING

two trials received support from drug companies; one trial received funding from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology; one trial received support from "Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (PHRC2009) and Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer"; and one trial did not provide information on support or sponsorship. We identified six ongoing randomised clinical trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the very low-certainty evidence found in four trials in people with curative-intent resection for cholangiocarcinoma, we are very uncertain of the effects of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (mitomycin-C and 5-FU; gemcitabine; gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin; or capecitabine) versus no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on mortality. The effects of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy compared with no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy on serious adverse events are also very uncertain, but the result of the single trial showed 20% higher occurrences of haematologic adverse events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as very low due to overall high risk of bias, and imprecision. Due to insufficient power of the only identified trial, the best postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy regimen in people with only cholangiocarcinoma could not be established. We also lack randomised clinical trials with outcome data on adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy versus adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in people with cholangiocarcinoma alone. There is a need for further randomised clinical trials designed to be at low risk of bias and with adequate sample size exploring the best adjuvant chemotherapy treatment after surgery in people with cholangiocarcinoma.

摘要

背景

胆管癌(胆管中的癌症)是一种侵袭性肿瘤,手术切除是其主要治疗方法。尽管进行了完全切除,但癌症仍会经常复发,导致患者预后不良。手术后给予辅助化疗可通过根除残留的癌症和微转移病灶来降低癌症复发的风险。手术后辅助化疗与安慰剂、无干预或其他辅助化疗在接受根治性切除术的胆管癌患者中的获益和危害尚不清楚。

目的

评估手术后辅助化疗与安慰剂、无干预或其他辅助化疗在接受根治性切除术的胆管癌患者中的获益和危害。

检索方法

我们在 Cochrane 肝胆疾病组对照试验注册库、Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库、MEDLINE、Embase、LILACS、科学引文索引扩展版和会议论文引文索引-科学中进行了电子检索,检索时间截至 2021 年 4 月 28 日,以寻找符合纳入标准的试验。

纳入标准

随机临床试验,无论是否设盲、发表状态或语言如何,比较有治愈性切除术的胆管癌患者接受术后辅助化疗与安慰剂、无干预或不同的术后辅助化疗方案。

数据收集和分析

我们使用标准的 Cochrane 方法来制定和开展综述。我们进行了荟萃分析,并尽可能使用随机效应模型和风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)来呈现结果。我们根据 Cochrane 建议的预设领域评估了偏倚风险,并在总结发现表中呈现了结局结果的证据确定性。

主要结果

我们纳入了五项已发表的随机临床试验。这些试验共纳入了 931 名年龄在 18 至 83 岁之间的成年人,他们接受了根治性切除术治疗胆管癌。四项试验比较了术后辅助化疗(丝裂霉素 C 和 5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU);吉西他滨;吉西他滨加奥沙利铂;或卡培他滨)与单独手术的无术后辅助化疗(手术单独)在 867 名胆管癌患者中的疗效。第五项试验比较了术后辅助 S-1(一种新型口服氟嘧啶衍生物)化疗与吉西他滨在 70 名肝内胆管癌、肝门部胆管癌(64 名参与者)和胆囊癌(6 名参与者)患者中的疗效。我们将所有纳入的试验都评估为总体高偏倚风险。其中一项试验在法国进行,三项在日本进行,一项在英国进行。由于缺乏数据,我们无法进行所有计划的比较分析。三项试验使用了意向治疗分析。另一项试验使用了方案分析。在其余的试验中,干预组和对照组各有一名参与者失访。然而,这两名参与者的结局并未描述。

术后辅助化疗与无术后辅助化疗

我们非常不确定术后辅助化疗对所有原因死亡率是否有较小或无影响,与无术后辅助化疗相比(RR 0.92,95%CI 0.84 至 1.01;4 项试验,867 名参与者,极低确定性证据)。我们对术后辅助化疗对严重不良事件的影响也非常不确定(RR 17.82,95%CI 2.43 至 130.82;1 项试验,219 名参与者,极低确定性证据)。该试验表明,术后辅助化疗可能会增加严重不良事件的发生,因为与无术后辅助化疗组(1/106,1.1%)相比,113 名参与者中有 19 名(20.5%)出现了不良事件。纳入的试验均未报告关于只有胆管癌患者的健康相关生活质量、癌症相关死亡率、肿瘤复发时间和非严重不良事件的数据。

辅助 S-1 化疗(氟嘧啶衍生物)与辅助 gemcitabine 为基础的化疗:唯一可用的试验分析了所有肝内、肝门部胆管癌和胆囊癌患者的数据,未单独提供胆管癌患者的数据。作者报告说,与吉西他滨为基础的化疗相比,术后辅助 S-1 治疗可降低主要肝切除术治疗胆道癌患者的一年总体死亡率。两年总体死亡率无差异。

资金来源

两项试验得到了制药公司的支持;一项试验得到了日本临床肿瘤学会的资助;一项试验得到了“Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (PHRC2009) 和 Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer”的支持;一项试验未提供支持或赞助信息。我们确定了六项正在进行的随机临床试验。

作者结论

基于四项在接受根治性切除术的胆管癌患者中进行的试验的极低确定性证据,我们非常不确定术后辅助化疗(丝裂霉素 C 和 5-FU;吉西他滨;吉西他滨加奥沙利铂;或卡培他滨)与无术后辅助化疗对死亡率的影响。与无术后辅助化疗相比,术后辅助化疗对严重不良事件的影响也非常不确定,但单一试验的结果显示,血液学不良事件的发生率高出 20%。我们将证据的确定性评估为极低,原因是总体偏倚风险高,且精确度低。由于仅有一项试验的结果,在仅患有胆管癌的患者中,最佳的术后辅助化疗方案尚无法确定。我们也缺乏随机临床试验,这些试验的结局数据为单独使用 S-1 化疗或吉西他滨为基础的化疗治疗胆管癌患者。需要进一步进行设计为低偏倚风险和具有足够样本量的随机临床试验,以探索在胆管癌患者中手术后的最佳辅助化疗治疗方法。

相似文献

1
Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable cholangiocarcinoma.可切除胆管癌的术后辅助化疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Sep 13;9(9):CD012814. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012814.pub2.
2
Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract carcinomas.基于吉西他滨的晚期胆管癌化疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 6;4(4):CD011746. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011746.pub2.
6
Oxycodone for cancer-related pain.羟考酮治疗癌性疼痛。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jun 9;6(6):CD003870. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003870.pub7.
7
Interventions for paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose.对乙酰氨基酚过量的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 23;2(2):CD003328. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003328.pub3.
9
Aural toilet (ear cleaning) for chronic suppurative otitis media.慢性化脓性中耳炎的耳道清理(耳部清洁)
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jun 9;6(6):CD013057. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013057.pub3.
10
Laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.激光疗法治疗增生性瘢痕和瘢痕疙瘩。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Sep 26;9(9):CD011642. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011642.pub2.

引用本文的文献

8
Advances in targeted therapy of cholangiocarcinoma.胆管癌的靶向治疗进展。
Ann Med. 2024 Dec;56(1):2310196. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2310196. Epub 2024 Feb 15.
10
Research trends in cholangiocarcinoma treatments during the last 3 decades.过去三十年胆管癌治疗的研究趋势。
Heliyon. 2023 Jun 20;9(7):e17100. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17100. eCollection 2023 Jul.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验