Peng Yishan, Liang Aijun, Chen Zhi, Yang Bin, Yu Wenke, Deng Jingduo, Fu Yu, Nie Yu, Cheng Yuan
General Surgery Center, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery II, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Clinical Research and Transformation Center for Artificial Liver, Institute of Regenerative Medicine, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Int J Surg. 2025 Feb 1;111(2):2182-2194. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000002161.
Despite complete resection, the recurrence rate of biliary tract cancer (BTC) remains high, leading to poor prognosis. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) following radical resection may substantially reduce the recurrence risk by eradicating micrometastatic lesions. However, the benefits of postoperative ACT and the optimal ACT strategy are still unclear for BTC. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the prognostic value of ACT and compare the effectiveness of different ACTs among BTC patients after curative resection.
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the benefits of ACT versus no intervention or other ACTs in BTC patients after curative resection. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed to compare overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The quality of evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.
Eight RCTs comprising 1803 patients were included in the meta-analysis. ACT was associated with significant improvements in 5-year all-cause mortality [four RCTs, hazard rate (HR) 0.93; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.87-1.00, marginally significant; low-certainty evidence], RFS (five RCTs, HR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78-0.98; moderate-certainty evidence), and OS (7 studies, HR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96; low-certainty evidence) compared with observation. ACT had significantly better survival benefits on patients with negative margins (R0), lymph node-positive (N+), and tumor node metastasis classification (TNM) stage I/II ( P < 0.05). Further network meta-analysis demonstrated that fluorouracil-based ACT was significantly inferior to gemcitabine-based ACT (HR 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.25) in improving RFS. However, both were superior to observation ( P < 0.05). No statistical difference in OS was observed between gemcitabine-based and fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (HR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.86-1.20). In subgroup analysis, fluorouracil-based ACT but not gemcitabine-based ACT achieved significantly better OS benefits on patients with N+ (HR 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.86) and R0 (HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.88).
Compared with observation, ACT should be routinely recommended to improve survival outcomes in BTC patients after curative resection, especially for those with R0, N+, and TNM stage I/II. Gemcitabine-based ACT performed better than other chemotherapies in improving RFS. This network meta-analysis provides precise information for determining the best adjuvant treatment for resected BTC. Further thorough and high-quality RCTs are needed.
尽管胆管癌(BTC)已完全切除,但其复发率仍然很高,导致预后不良。根治性切除术后的术后辅助化疗(ACT)可能通过消除微转移病灶大幅降低复发风险。然而,术后ACT的益处以及最佳ACT策略对于BTC仍不明确。本研究的目的是评估ACT的预后价值,并比较BTC患者根治性切除后不同ACT的有效性。
在PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、科学网和EMBASE数据库中进行全面的文献检索,以识别比较ACT与不干预或其他ACT在BTC患者根治性切除后的益处的随机对照试验(RCT)。进行随机效应网络荟萃分析以比较总生存期(OS)和无复发生存期(RFS)。使用推荐分级评估、制定和评价框架对证据质量进行评级。
荟萃分析纳入了8项RCT,共1803例患者。与观察相比,ACT与5年全因死亡率(4项RCT,风险比[HR]0.93;95%置信区间[CI],0.87 - 1.00,边缘显著;低确定性证据)、RFS(5项RCT,HR 0.87;95%CI,0.78 - 0.98;中度确定性证据)和OS(7项研究HR 0.85;95%CI,0.75 - 0.96;低确定性证据)的显著改善相关。ACT对切缘阴性(R0)、淋巴结阳性(N+)和肿瘤淋巴结转移分类(TNM)I/II期患者的生存益处显著更好(P < 0.05)。进一步的网络荟萃分析表明,基于氟尿嘧啶的ACT在改善RFS方面显著劣于基于吉西他滨的ACT(HR 1.20;95%CI,1.一零 - 1.25)。然而,两者均优于观察(P < 0.05)。基于吉西他滨的化疗与基于氟尿嘧啶的化疗在OS方面未观察到统计学差异(HR 1.00;95%CI,0.86 - 1.20)。在亚组分析中,基于氟尿嘧啶的ACT而非基于吉西他滨的ACT对N+(HR 0.一六七;95%CI,0.52 - 0.86)和R0(HR 0.69;95%CI,0.54 - 0.88)患者的OS益处显著更好。
与观察相比,应常规推荐ACT以改善BTC患者根治性切除后的生存结局,特别是对于那些R0、N+和TNM I/II期患者。基于吉西他滨的ACT在改善RFS方面比其他化疗表现更好。该网络荟萃分析为确定切除的BTC的最佳辅助治疗提供了精确信息。需要进一步进行全面且高质量的RCT。