Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Hepatol. Oct 27, 2020; 12(10): 693-708
Published online Oct 27, 2020. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693
Published online Oct 27, 2020. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693
Table 1 Rationale for the use of neoadjuvant therapy in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Rationale for the use of neoadjuvant therapy in ICC | |
1 | Downstaging of locally advanced tumors |
2 | Improve margin-negative resection rate |
3 | Increase receipt of systemic therapy given challenges in delivering postoperative chemotherapy |
4 | Prioritize the early systemic treatment of potential micrometastatic disease |
5 | Enhance patient selection for major surgery |
6 | Facilitate an in vivo test of chemotherapy’s effectiveness |
Table 2 Select studies on neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Ref. | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Conversion to resection | Tumor response |
Kato et al[46], 2013 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine | 22 | 8 (37%) | 3 PR, 11 SD, 8 PD |
Kato et al[47], 2015 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine plus cisplatin | 39 | 10 (26%) | 9PR, 21 SD, 9 PD |
Rayar et al[71], 2017 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine and/or platinums; Y-90 TARE | 45 | 10 (22%) | NR |
Konstantinidis et al[79], 2017 | Retrospective | Bevacizumab + FUDR HAI | 104 | 8 (8%) | NR |
Omichi et al[110], 2017 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine based therapy | 43 | 43 (100%) | NR |
Le Roy et al[48], 2018 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin | 74 | 39 (53%) | 18 PR, 33 SD, 23 PD |
Sumiyoshi et al[112], 2018 | Retrospective | S-1 + IMRT | 7 | 5 (71%) | 4 PR, 1 SD, 2 PD |
Table 3 Select studies on neoadjuvant transarterial chemoembolization for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Ref. | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Conversion to resection | Tumor response |
Burger et al[58], 2005 | Retrospective | Cisplatin, doxorubicin, and mitomycin-C | 17 | 2 (12%) | NR |
Herber et al[59],2007 | Retrospective | Mitomycin-C | 15 | BR | 1 PR, 9 SD, 4PD |
Gusani et al[60], 2008 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine-based | 42 | NR | 20 SD, 15 PD |
Hyder et al[61], 2013 | Retrospective – multi-institutional | cTACE (64.7%), DEB-TACE (5.6%), bland embolization (6.6%), or Y-90 (23.2%) | 198 | NR | 56 PR, 77 SD, 29 PD |
Vogl et al[62], 2012 | Retrospective | Mit-C (20.9%), Gem. (7%), Mit-C +Gem (47%), Gem+ Mit-C and Cisplatin (25.1%) | 115 | NR | 10 PR, 66 SD, 39 PD |
Alibertti et al[64], 2017 | Retrospective | DEB-TACE and PEG-TACE | 127 | 4 (4%) | 19 PR, 101 SD, 7 PD |
Schiffman et al[65], 2011 | Retrospective | EBIRI or DEB-DOX therapy | 24 | 3 (13%) | 1CR, 1PR, 13 SD, 3 PD |
Kuhlmann et al[66], 2012 | Prospective | Irinotecan (iDEB-TACE), mitomycin-C (cTACE) | 41 | 1 (4%) | 2 PR, 12 SD, 19 PD |
Poggi et al[67], 2009 | Retrospective | DEB-TACE | 9 | 3 (33%) | 4 PR, 5 SD |
Table 4 Select studies on neoadjuvant transarterial radioembolization/selective internal radiation therapy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Ref. | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Conversion to resection | Tumor response |
Ibrahim et al[68], 2008 | Prospective | Y-90 | 24 | 1 (4%) | 6PR, 15 SD, 1PD |
Mouli et al[69], 2013 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 46 | 5 (11%) | 11 PR, 33 SD, 1 PD |
Rayar et al[71], 2015 | Retrospective | Gemcitabine followed by Y-90 | 10 | 8 (80%) | NR |
Saxena et al[72], 2010 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 25 | 1 (4%) | 6 PR, 11 SD, 5 PD |
Rafi et al[73], 2012 | Prospective | Y-90 | 19 | NR | 2 PR, 13 SD, 4 PD |
Hoffman et al[74], 2012 | Prospective | Y-90 | 33 | NR | 12 PR, 17 SD, 5 PD |
Riby et al[75], 2020 | Retrospective | Y-90 | 19 | 19 (100%) | NR |
Edeline et al[76], 2019 | Phase II Trial | GemCis + Y-90 | 26 | 9 (22%) | NR |
Table 5 Select studies on neoadjuvant hepatic artery infusion for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Ref. | Study type | Intervention | Sample size | Conversion to resection | Tumor response |
Jarnagin et al[77], 2009 | Phase II trial | HAI | 26 | 1 (4%) | 14 PR, 11 SD, 1PD |
Kemeny et al[78], 2011 | Phase II trail | HAI + bevacizumab | 18 | 3 (17%) | 7 PR, 11 SD |
Konstantinidis et al[79], 2015 | Retrospective | HAI + chemotherapy | 93 | 8 (4%) | NR |
Massani et al[80], 2015 | Retrospective | HAI | 11 | 3 (27%) | 5 PR, 2 SD, |
Tanaka et al[113], 2002 | Retrospective | HAI | 11 | 1 (9%) | 7 PR, 2 SD, 2 PD |
Shitara et al[114], 2008 | Retrospective | HAI | 20 | NR | 1CR, 9PR, 8 SD, 2PD |
Ghiringhelli et al[115], 2013 | Retrospective | HAI | 12 | 2 (17%) | 8 PR, 3 SD, 1 PD |
- Citation: Akateh C, Ejaz AM, Pawlik TM, Cloyd JM. Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. World J Hepatol 2020; 12(10): 693-708
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v12/i10/693.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v12.i10.693