Neoadjuvant therapy reduces node positivity but does not confer survival benefit versus up-front resection for resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A propensity-matched analysis
- PMID: 39082443
- DOI: 10.1002/jso.27743
Neoadjuvant therapy reduces node positivity but does not confer survival benefit versus up-front resection for resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A propensity-matched analysis
Abstract
Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) is a treatment option for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), though its impact on short-term oncologic outcomes and long-term survival remains relatively unknown.
Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) between 2004 and 2019 was queried for patients with reportedly resectable (Stage I-IIIB) iCCA who received curative-intent resection with lymphadenectomy. Propensity matching was performed between groups based on the use of NAST and groups were compared for overall survival (OS) and oncologic outcomes, including nodal harvest, rate of node positivity, rate of positive margins, and administration of adjuvant therapy.
Results: Two thousand and five hundred ninety-six patients met inclusion criteria; 364 (14%) received NAST versus 1763 (68%) up-front resection. After matching, 332 pairs of patients were matched between NAST and no NAST. Patients receiving NAST had a greater nodal harvest (OR = 1.26 [1.09-1.88]; p < 0.001) and a lower rate of node positivity (OR = 0.67 [0.49-0.63]; p < 0.001). Patients without NAST were more likely to complete adjuvant systemic therapy (OR = 0.45 [0.33-0.62]; p < 0.001). However, patients receiving NAST had no OS benefit after resection compared to those who did not receive NAST (median OS 48.3 ± 5.3 vs. 38.8 ± 3.7 months; p = 0.160). Node-positive disease (OR = 2.10 [1.78-2.45]; p < 0.001) conferred the greatest risk for reduced OS followed by positive-margin resection (OR = 1.42 [1.21-1.47]; p < 0.001) and increasing T-stage (OR = 1.34 [1.21-1.47]; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: NAST for iCCA was associated with improved quality of oncologic resection but did not confer an OS benefit versus up-front resection.
Keywords: intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; neoadjuvant therapy; node positivity.
© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Surgical Oncology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Chang KY, Chang JY, Yen Y. Increasing incidence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and its relationship to chronic viral hepatitis. J Natl Comprehensive Cancer Network: JNCCN. 2009;7(4):423‐427.
-
- Amini N, Ejaz A, Spolverato G, Kim Y, Herman JM, Pawlik TM. Temporal trends in liver‐directed therapy of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a population‐based analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110(2):163‐170.
-
- Mavros MN, Economopoulos KP, Alexiou VG, Pawlik TM. Treatment and prognosis for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(6):565‐574.
-
- Bartolini I, Risaliti M, Fortuna L, et al. Current management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: from resection to palliative treatments. Radiol Oncol. 2020;54(3):263‐271.
-
- Primrose JN, Fox RP, Palmer DH, et al. Capecitabine compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (BILCAP): a randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(5):663‐673.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous