Survival Benefits of Simple Versus Extended Cholecystectomy and Lymphadenectomy for Patients With T2 Gallbladder Cancer: A Propensity-Matched Population-Based Study (2010 to 2015)

ObjectiveThis article aims to evaluate the survival benefits of simple cholecystectomy, extended cholecystectomy, as well as scope regional lymphadenectomy for T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients.MethodsWe identified eligible patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The confounding factors were controlled via propensity score matching. The log-rank test was utilized to compare overall survival. The multivariate Cox regression was then used to determine risk factors.ResultsOverall, data from 1,009 patients were obtained. The median overall survival (OS) of 915 patients that underwent simple cholecystectomy was 15 months; the median OS of 94 patients that underwent extended cholecystectomy was 17 months. There were no significant differences before and after propensity score matching (p = 0.542 and p = 0.258). The patients who received regional lymphadenectomy did show significant survival benefit, compared to those who did not receive regional lymphadenectomy. Furthermore, this benefit is observed in the N0 stage, but not observed in the N1 stage. In addition, the OS of patients who received lymphadenectomy for four or more regions was significantly better than those who received one to three regions lymphadenectomy. Age, the scope of regional lymphadenectomy, N stage, and tumor size were identified as prognostic factors.ConclusionsExtended cholecystectomy was not observed to significantly improve postoperative prognosis of patients with T2 GBC. However, there was a significant survival benefit shown for those with regional lymphadenectomy, particularly for patients with negative lymph nodes. Future studies on the control of potential confounding factors and longer follow-ups are still needed.

Prognostic Significance of Tumor Location in T2 Gallbladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: The AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, Eighth Edition, subdivided T2 GBC into T2a and T2b. However, there still exist a lack of evidence on the prognostic significance of tumor location. The aim of the present study was to examine the existing evidence to determine the prognostic significance of tumor location of T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) and to evaluate the optimal surgical extent according to tumor location. (2) Methods: We searched for relevant literature published in the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase before September 2020 using search terms related to gallbladder, cancer, and stage. Data were weighted and pooled using random-effects modeling. (3) Results: Seven studies were deemed eligible for inclusion, representing a cohort of 1789 cases of resected T2 GBC. The overall survival for T2b tumor was significantly worse than that for T2a tumor (HR, 2.141; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.140 to 4.023; I2 = 71.4%; Pchi2 = 0.007). The rate of lymph node metastasis was lower in the T2a group (26.6%) than in the T2b group (36.6%) (OR, 2.164; 95% CI, 1.309 to 3.575). There was no evidence of a survival difference between the patients who underwent extended cholecystectomy and simple cholecystectomy in T2a GBC (OR, 0.802; 95% CI, 0.618 to 1.042) and T2b GBC (OR, 0.820; 95% CI, 0.620 to 1.083). (4) Conclusions: Hepatic side tumor was a significant poor prognostic factor in T2 GBC. Extended cholecystectomy and simple cholecystectomy showed comparable survival outcomes in T2 GBC, and additional large-scale prospective studies are warranted to establish evidence-based treatment guidelines for T2 GBC.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin followed by radical liver resection versus immediate radical liver resection alone with or without adjuvant chemotherapy in incidentally detected gallbladder carcinoma after simple cholecystectomy or in front of radical resection of BTC (ICC/ECC): A phase III study utilizing the German Registry of Incidental Gallbladder Carcinoma Platform (GR)—The AIO/CALGP/ACO-GAIN-Trial.

TPS4653 Background: Currently, complete surgical resection represents the only potentially curative treatment option for Biliary Tract Cancer (BTC) including Gallbladder Cancer (GBC). Even after curative resection, 5-year OS is only 20–40%. GBC is relatively rare, but still the fifth most common neoplasm of the digestive tract and even the most frequent cancer of the biliary system. Gallbladder carcinoma is suspected preoperatively in only 30% of all pts, while the majority of cases are discovered incidentally by the pathologist after cholecystectomy for a benign indication. For improving curative rates in BTC and GBC, early systemic therapy combined with radical resection seems to be a promising approach. The earliest moment to apply chemotherapy would be in front of radical surgery. Encouraging results of neoadjuvant/perioperative concepts in other malignancies provide an additional rationale to use this treatment in the early phase of GBC management and even in intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Especially because data regarding pure adjuvant chemotherapy in BTC`s are conflicting. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label phase III study including pts with incidentally discovered GBCs after simple cholecystectomy in front of radical liver resection and pts with resectable/borderline resectable cholangiocarcinomas (ICC/ECC) scheduled to receive perioperative chemotherapy (Gemcitabine + Cisplatin 3 cycles pre- and post-surgery) or surgery alone followed by a therapy of investigator’s choice. Primary endpoint is OS; secondary endpoints are PFS, R0-resection rate, toxicity, perioperative morbidity, mortality and QoL. A total of N=333 patients with GBC or BTC will be included. Recruitment has just started; first patient in was on December 6, 2020. EudraCT number: 2017-004444-38. Clinical trial information: NCT03673072 .

Trends in Treatment and Survival of Gallbladder Cancer in the Netherlands; Identifying Gaps and Opportunities from a Nation-Wide Cohort

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is rare in Western populations and data about treatment and outcomes are scarce. This study aims to analyze survival and identify opportunities for improvement using population-based data from a low-incidence country. GBC patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2016 with GBC were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were grouped according to time period (2005–2009/2010–2016) and disease stage. Trends in treatment and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. In total 1834 patients were included: 661 (36%) patients with resected, 278 (15%) with non-resected non-metastatic, and 895 (49%) with metastatic GBC. Use of radical versus simple cholecystectomy (12% vs. 26%, p < 0.001) in early (pT1b/T2) GBC increased. More patients with metastatic GBC received chemotherapy (11% vs. 29%, p < 0.001). OS improved from 4.8 months (2005–2009) to 6.1 months (2010–2016) (p = 0.012). Median OS increased over time (2005–2009 vs. 2010–2016) in resected (19.4 to 26.8 months, p = 0.038) and metastatic (2.3 vs. 3.4 months, p = 0.001) GBC but not in unresected, non-metastatic GBC. In early GBC, patients with radical cholecystectomy had a median OS of 76.7 compared to 18.4 months for simple cholecystectomy (p < 0.001). Palliative chemotherapy showed superior (p < 0.001) survival in metastatic (7.3 versus 2.1 months) and non-resected non-metastatic (7.7 versus 3.5 months) GBC. In conclusion, survival of GBC remains poor. Radical surgery and palliative chemotherapy appear to improve prognosis but remain under-utilized.

Long-term outcomes of surgical resection for T1b gallbladder cancer: an institutional evaluation

Background There is no comprehensive agreement concerning the overall performance of radical resection for T1b gallbladder cancer (GBC). This research focused on addressing whether T1b GBC may spread loco-regionally and whether radical resection is necessary. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted of 1032 patients with GBC who underwent surgical resection at our centre and its affiliated institutions between January 1982 and December 2018. A total of 47 patients with T1b GBC, 29 (62%) of whom underwent simple cholecystectomy and 18 (38%) of whom underwent radical resection with regional lymph node dissection, were enrolled in the study. Results GBC was diagnosed pre-operatively in 16 patients (34%), whereas 31 patients (66%) had incidental GBC. There was no blood venous or perineural invasion in any patient on histology evaluation, except for lymphatic vessel invasion in a single patient. There were no metastases in any analysed lymph nodes. The open surgical approach was more prevalent among the 18 patients who underwent radical resection (open in all 18 patients) than among the 29 patients who underwent simple cholecystectomy (open in 21; laparoscopic in 8) (P = 0.017). The cumulative 10- and 20-year overall survival rates were 65 and 25%, respectively. The outcome following simple cholecystectomy (10-year overall survival rate of 66%) was akin to that following radical resection (64%, P = 0.618). The cumulative 10- and 20-year disease-specific survival rates were 93 and 93%, respectively. The outcome following simple cholecystectomy (10-year disease-specific survival rate of 100%) was equivalent to that following radical resection (that of 86%, P = 0.151). While age (> 70 years, hazard ratio 5.285, P = 0.003) and gender (female, hazard ratio 0.272, P = 0.007) had a strong effect on patient overall survival, surgical procedure (simple cholecystectomy vs. radical resection) and surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic) did not. Conclusions Most T1b GBCs represent local disease. As pre-operative diagnosis, including tumour penetration of T1b GBC, is difficult, the decision of radical resection is justified. Additional radical resection is not required following simple cholecystectomy provided that the penetration depth is restricted towards the muscular layer and that surgical margins are uninvolved.