4.7 Article

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Followed by Surgery for Locally Advanced Gallbladder Cancers: A New Paradigm

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 9, Pages 3009-3015

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5197-0

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Locally advanced (T3/T4) gallbladder cancers with large fixed portal nodes have a dismal prognosis. If undertaken, surgery entails extensive resections with high morbidity; therefore, in many centers, patients are offered palliative chemotherapy. In this prospective study, we used neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation with the intention of downstaging and facilitating R0 resection of these tumors. Twenty-eight patients with locally advanced carcinoma gallbladder (stage III, having deep liver infiltrations and/or large portal nodes) underwent prior positron emission tomography/computed tomography to rule out metastatic disease. All were treated with concomitant chemoradiation using helical tomotherapy (dose of 57 Gy over 25 fractions to the gross tumor and 45 Gy over 25 fractions to the surrounding nodes) with injectable gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2)/week x 5 weeks). Of the 28 patients, 25 (89 %) successfully completed planned chemoradiation and 20 (71 %) achieved partial or complete radiologic response. Eighteen (64 %) patients were surgically explored, of whom 14 (56 %) achieved R0 resection. At the median follow-up of 37 months for the surviving patients, the median overall survival (OS) was 20 months for all patients. Only one patient recurred in the common bile duct postsurgery, whereas six patients had distant metastasis. The 5-year OS was 24 % for all patients and 47 % for patients with R0 resection. Biliary leak was seen in 6 (43 %) patients, of whom two required interventions. Locally advanced unresectable cancers may benefit from neoadjuvant chemoradiation to facilitate a curative resection with a good survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available