Adjuvant treatment in resected biliary cancers: fluoropyrimidines on the spotlight
Pedro Luiz Serrano Uson Junior,Mitesh J. Borad
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-24-1007
2024-10-01
Translational Cancer Research
Abstract:Pedro Luiz Serrano Uson Junior 1,2,3 , Mitesh J. Borad 1 1 Division of Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA; 2 Division of Hematology/Oncology, Hospital do Coração, HCOR, Sao Paulo, Brazil; 3 Center for Personalized Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Sao Paulo, Brazil Comment on: Nakachi K, Ikeda M, Konishi M, et al . Adjuvant S-1 compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (JCOG1202, ASCOT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2023;401:195-203. Keywords: Capecitabine; biliary tract cancer (BTC); S1; fluoropyrimidines Submitted Jun 17, 2024. Accepted for publication Aug 28, 2024. Published online Sep 27, 2024. doi: 10.21037/tcr-24-1007 We read with great interest the article published by Nakachi et al. , a randomized phase III trial that evaluated adjuvant treatment with S-1 for 24 weeks or observation in resected biliary tract cancers (BTC) (1). This trial is very important considering that other chemotherapy regimens including gemcitabine and gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin were evaluated in randomized trials in the same scenario with negative results (2,3). BTCs are a group of malignancies that arises from the bile ducts or gallbladder. Although rare, more than half of the cases can be diagnosed in advanced stages and the overall prognosis is poor (1). Patients submitted to surgery can be treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, however the data of trials are contradictory (2-7). Also, it is very common surgical specimens with locally advanced disease with positive lymph nodes and not complete resections in the trials (1-8). Two trials were positive with oral fluoropyrimidines in the adjuvant setting. In this editorial we will address and compare both trials. The ASCOT study was a randomized phase III trial conducted in 38 Japanese hospitals and included patients with cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder, and ampullary cancers that underwent resection (1). Patients were randomized to the observation group or to receive S-1, orally administered twice daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks of rest for four cycles (1). The study was conducted between 2013 and 2018, and a total of 440 patients were randomized between the two arms, with a data cutoff date of June 23, 2021 (1). The trial met its primary endpoint, with improvements in 3-year overall survival (OS) of 77.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 70.9–82.1%] in the S-1 group, compared with 67.6% (95% CI: 61.0–73.3%) in the observation group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51–0.94; one-sided P=0.008]. Furthermore, improvements in relapse-free survival (RFS) were also observed; 3-year RFS was 62.4% (95% CI: 55.6–68.4%) in the S-1 group compared to 50.9% (95% CI: 44.1–57.2%) in the observation group (HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.61–1.04; two-sided P=0.088) (1). The toxicity associated with S-1 was manageable, including biliary tract infection (7%) and decreased neutrophil count (14%), which are more common grades 3–4 adverse events (AEs) (1). Before this trial, adjuvant treatment for resected BTC had been investigated multiple times (4). A meta-analysis, including twenty studies with more than 6 thousand patients evaluated, concluded that adjuvant systemic treatments in resected BTC could improve OS, particularly in node-positive and margin-positive cases (4). However, when all the studies were evaluated, including two registry studies, the meta-analysis was negative (4). More recently, the BILCAP trial was the first to show some improvements in OS with adjuvant chemotherapy in resected BTC (5). The trial was conducted in the United Kingdom; a total of 44 centers participated in the recruitment. It was a controlled, randomized trial. The study randomized resected BTC (cholangiocarcinoma or gallbladder) patients to receive oral capecitabine twice daily on days 1–14 of a 21-day cycle, for eight cycles, or observation. A total of 447 patients were included between 2006 and 2014, with the data cutoff date of March 6, 2017 (5). The study did not meet its primary endpoint, with a median OS by intention-to-treat (ITT) of 51.1 months (95% CI: 34.6–59.1) in the capecitabine group compared to 36.4 months (29.7–44.5) in the observation group (HR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.63–1.04; P=0.097) (5). However, after a sensitivity analysis adjusting for nodal status, sex, and disease grade, the study was positive for improving median OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55–0.92; P=0.010). Furthermore, the ITT median RFS was longer with capecitabine than with observation, at 24.4 months (95% CI: 18.6–35.9) versus 17.5 months (12.0–23.8), particularly in the first 2 years (HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.58–0.98; P=0.033) (5). There are some points that these two randomized controlled trials have in common and some points that are misaligned. First, both -Abstract Truncated-
oncology