The NCCN Guidelines for Biliary Tract Cancers (BTCs) provide recommendations for the evaluation and comprehensive care of patients with gallbladder cancer, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The multidisciplinary panel of experts is convened at least once annually to review requests from internal and external entities as well as to evaluate new data on current and emerging therapies. This manuscript focuses on the adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation treatment options for BTCs as well as the systemic treatment recommendations for patients with advanced BTCs.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Biliary Tract Cancers, Version 2.2023
In 2023, the NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers were divided into 2 separate guidelines: Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Biliary Tract Cancers. The NCCN Guidelines for Biliary Tract Cancers provide recommendations for the evaluation and comprehensive care of patients with gallbladder cancer, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The multidisciplinary panel of experts meets at least on an annual basis to review requests from internal and external entities as well as to evaluate new data on current and emerging therapies. These Guidelines Insights focus on some of the recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Biliary Tract Cancers as well as the newly published section on principles of molecular testing.
Multiagent Chemotherapy Followed by Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Resected Pancreas Cancer
Background and Purpose: Chemotherapy followed by margin-negative resection (R0) is the treatment of choice for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Neoadjuvant multiagent chemotherapy (MAC) or MAC then radiotherapy (RT) may optimize surgical candidacy. The purpose of this study was to compare pathologic outcomes of MAC followed by conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CRT) versus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with resected PDAC. Methods: Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic PDAC between 2012 and 2017 and who received preoperative MAC or MAC+RT were identified in the National Cancer Database. Variables associated with R0 and overall survival were identified with logistic regression and Cox analysis (P<0.05). Results: A total of 5273 patients were identified (MAC: 3900, MAC+CRT: 955, MAC+SBRT: 418). The median RT dose/fraction (fx) in the MAC+CRT and MAC+SBRT cohorts was 50.4 Gy/28 fx and 33 Gy/5 fx. Patients receiving MAC+CRT versus MAC+SBRT had similar rates of ypT3-T4 disease (54% vs. 58%, P=0.187), R0 (87% vs. 84%, P=0.168), and pathologic complete response (pathologic complete response; 6% vs. 4%, P=0.052), however, MAC+CRT was associated with less regional lymphatic disease (ypN+: 28% vs. 41%, P<0.001). The median overall survival of patients receiving MAC+CRT versus MAC+SBRT was 24.6 versus 29.5 months (P=0.045). Conclusions: For patients with resected PDAC, MAC+CRT, and MAC+SBRT had similar rates of R0 and pathologic complete response, although MAC+CRT was associated with lower ypN+. Prospective evaluation of neoadjuvant RT regimens with attention to radiation therapy design is warranted.
Hepatobiliary Cancers, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), gallbladder cancer, and cancer of the bile ducts (intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma). Due to the multiple modalities that can be used to treat the disease and the complications that can arise from comorbid liver dysfunction, a multidisciplinary evaluation is essential for determining an optimal treatment strategy. A multidisciplinary team should include hepatologists, diagnostic radiologists, interventional radiologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, and pathologists with hepatobiliary cancer expertise. In addition to surgery, transplant, and intra-arterial therapies, there have been great advances in the systemic treatment of HCC. Until recently, sorafenib was the only systemic therapy option for patients with advanced HCC. In 2020, the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab became the first regimen to show superior survival to sorafenib, gaining it FDA approval as a new frontline standard regimen for unresectable or metastatic HCC. This article discusses the NCCN Guidelines recommendations for HCC.
A phase II study of atezolizumab (ATEZO) and bevacizumab (Bev) in combination with Y90 TARE in patients (Pts) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
TPS358 Background: The anti–PD-L1 antibody ATEZO prevents PD-L1 from interacting with PD-1 and B7.1, thus reinvigorating antitumor T cell activity. Anti-VEGF BEV can increase dendritic cell maturation, enhance T cell infiltration, and reduce myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T-cells in tumors. This combination has been FDA approved for first-line treatment of advanced HCC based on the IMbrave 150 study. On the other hand, locoregional radiotherapy (e.g., Y90 TARE) enhances the diversity of the intratumoral T cell receptor repertoire. It is the standard of care for pts with intermediate-stage HCC (iHCC). Based on preclinical and clinical data, we hypothesize that the combination of Y90 TARE, BEV, and ATEZO induces synergistic tumor-killing. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II study of Y90 TARE and BEV plus ATEZO compared with Y90 TARE alone in pts with unresectable IHCC. The primary study objective is to assess and compare the progression-free survival (PFS) (per mRECIST 1.1) of pts in each arm. The main secondary objective is to determine the safety and tolerability (CTCAE v5) of TARE combined with ATEZO and BEV in pts with HCC. Exploratory objectives are to assess the role of the immunoscore and PD-L1 expression levels in the prediction of improved clinical outcome in pts receiving Y-90 TARE and BEV plus ATEZO; the composition of tumor-infiltrating immune cell subtypes in predicting response to a chosen therapy; how Y90 therapy affects the proportion of antigen-presenting cells in the tumor; and symptoms experienced by pts receiving TARE and BEV plus ATEZO treatment, using patient-reported outcomes. Eligible pts have either HCC that is not amenable to surgical resection, confirmed by pathology review, or at least BCLC stage B HCC outside of downstaging criteria. Other standard eligibility criteria apply. Pts must have a pretreatment liver biopsy taken and then be randomized 1:1 to TARE (Arm A) or TARE followed by ATEZO and BEV (Arm B). Pts will have TARE mapping during week (wk) 1 and TARE treatment during wk 2. In Arm B, pts will start BEV plus ATEZO 4 wks (±1 wk) after TARE treatment. Pts will have abdominal MRI or CT scans every 12 weeks, CT scans of the chest every 24 wks, and a second tumor biopsy at 4 wks. Disease progression will be captured by both RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST. We plan to assess the safety of TARE with BEV and ATEZO in the first 10 pts randomized to Arm B for two cycles. If there are no grade ≥ 3 unexpected toxicities possibly, probably or definitely related to combined TARE plus BEV plus ATEZO, the study will continue to accrue 128 pts in total. Pts will continue study treatment (Arm B) for a total of 24 months from initiation of TARE or until intolerable toxicity or disease progression occur, whichever is earlier. Enrollment began in September 2020. Clinical trial information: NCT04541173.
Guidelines Insights: Hepatobiliary Cancers, Version 2.2019
The NCCN Guidelines for Hepatobiliary Cancers provide treatment recommendations for cancers of the liver, gallbladder, and bile ducts. The NCCN Hepatobiliary Cancers Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s discussion and updated recommendations regarding systemic therapy for first-line and subsequent-line treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
SWOG S1310: Randomized phase II trial of single agent MEK inhibitor trametinib vs. 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine in refractory advanced biliary cancer.
4016 Background: No standard treatment options are available for patients with advanced BC who fail gemcitabine/platinum therapy. The rationale for evaluation of trametinib was based on the presence of MAPK alterations and on earlier promising results with other MEK inhibitors in BC. Methods: Pts with histologically proven BC who progressed on gemcitabine/platinum were randomized to trametinib (2mg qd) (Arm A) vs infusional 5FU at 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours or capecitabine (1000 mg/m2PO days 1-14 BID) (Arm B). Patients were stratified by planned chemotherapy 5FU/LV vs capecitabine; and disease site: cholangiocarcinoma vs gallbladder. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate (RR). 80 eligible patients (40 for each arm) were needed to detect an improvement in median OS from 5 months to 8.25 months (1.65 HR). A planned interim futility analysis of objective response was performed on the first 14 pts registered to the trametinib arm. Results: The study was stopped early based on the lack of measurable response in the trametinib arm. 53 pts were randomized (27 pts in Arm A vs 26 pts in Arm B). Median age was 62 years and the primary sites of tumor were cholangiocarcinoma (77%) and gallbladder (23%). Median OS was 4.3 months (95% CI 3.1-5.1) for Arm A, and 8.0 months (95% CI 3.2-14.6) for Arm B with a HR of 2.02 (95% CI 1.01-4.03, p=0.05). The median PFS was 1.3 months (95% CI 1.2-1.5) for arm A and 2.8 months (95% CI 1.4-6.9) for arm B with a HR of 2.95 (95% CI 1.38-6.30, p=0.01). Overall RR was 8% (95% CI 0%, 19%) in Arm A vs 10% (95% CI 0%, 23%) in Arm B (p>0.99), and 8% vs 45% had stable disease. Eight pts in Arm A experienced treatment-related ≥ grade 3 toxicities, including one death due to vomiting/dehydration. Seven pts in Arm B experienced treatment-related grade 3 toxicities; no higher grade toxicities were reported. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective randomized study of a targeted agent versus chemotherapy for the second line treatment of BC. In this unselected population, the lack of response to trametinib resulted in early closure. The PFS and OS for trametinib were inferior to 5FU. Clinical trial information: 02042443.