复方苦参注射液联合化疗治疗晚期消化道肿瘤的近期疗效观察

目的:观察复方苦参注射液联合化疗治疗晚期消化道肿瘤患者的临床疗效和生活质量。方法:160例晚期消化道肿瘤患者随机分为治疗组(复方苦参注射液联合化疗组)和对照组(单用化疗组)。分别治疗一疗程。结果:两组无CR病例,治疗组PR 3 4例,总有效率4 2.5%;对照组PR 29例,总有效率36.3%,差异无显著性(P>0.05)。治疗组疼痛总的缓解率为85.0%,对照组为68.8%,两组差异有显著性(P<0.05),尤其对轻、中度疼痛治疗组的效果更为明显。治疗组KPS评分提高51例,占63.8%,对照组KPS评分提高36例,占45%,差异有显著性(P<0.05)。体重变化两组之间无显著性差异(P>0.05)。毒副作用两组之间无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:复方苦参注射液联合化疗治疗晚期消化道肿瘤可提高疗效、改善生活质量。     

热疗联合化疗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌临床观察

目的:观察全身化疗加热疗及单纯全身化疗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效,毒副反应及临床受益率。方法:60例晚期非小细胞肺癌患者入组,其中热化疗组(A组)32例,单纯化疗组(B组)28例,均采用NP(长春瑞滨 顺铂)或GP(吉西他滨 顺铂)方案化疗2个周期。热化疗组使用(13.56±0.2)MHz高频热疗机同步进行局部热疗,每周2次,共10次。结果:热化疗组有效率21.9%,单纯化疗组14.3%,两组有效率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);热化疗组临床受益率为68.8%,而单纯化疗组为35.7%,两组临床受益率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者治疗前后KPS评分的变化有统计学意义,两组毒副作用无明显差异,中位生存期有显著差异(11.2vs16.3个月)。结论:临床观察显示热、化疗联合治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌具有良好的耐受性和较好的近期疗效。     

FOLFOX 4方案治疗肝细胞癌肝移植术后复发的临床观察

目的探讨FOLFOX 4方案治疗肝细胞癌(HCC)肝移植术后肿瘤复发或转移晚期患者的疗效和不良反应。方法回顾性分析2008年1月至2020年12月46例HCC肝移植术后复发或转移的晚期患者的临床资料,其中22例接受FOLFOX 4方案化疗(化疗组),余24例接受最佳支持治疗(BSC组)。比较两组的近期疗效、无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)并记录FOLFOX 4方案的不良反应。结果两组均无完全缓解病例,其中化疗组获部分缓解(PR)3例、稳定(SD)12例和进展(PD)7例,而BSC组获PR 1例、SD 8例和PD 15例,化疗组和BSC组的有效率为13.6%和4.2%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),而化疗组的疾病控制率为68.2%,高于BSC组的37.5%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。化疗组的中位PFS为7.0(95%CI:2.536~11.464)个月,长于BSC组的3.0(95%CI:1.895~4.105)个月,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。化疗组和BSC组的中位OS分别为16.0(95%CI:9.049~22.951)和14.0(95%CI:8.620~19.380)个月,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。FOLFOX 4方案主要不良反应包括中性粒细胞减少、血小板减少、转氨酶升高、恶心、呕吐、腹泻、手足麻木和奥沙利铂过敏等,以1~2级为主。结论FOLFOX 4方案化疗对HCC肝移植术后复发或转移的晚期患者有一定的疗效,安全性良好。     

国产吉西他滨单药治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床研究

目的:研究国产盐酸吉西他滨治疗PS2IIIB～Ⅳ期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的疗效,不良反应及对生活质量的影响。方法:48例NSCLC患者随机分为2组:最佳支持治疗组(BSC组):给予对症支持治疗;吉西他滨组(GEM组):在对症支持治疗基础上,加用吉西他滨单药化疗,盐酸吉西他滨1000mg/m2加0.9%氯化钠100ml,于30～60min内静脉滴注,第1,8,15天各1次,每28d为1个周期。治疗2周期后评价疗效及生活质量评分。结果:入组的48例中,可评价疗效病例45例。GEM组可评价21例,5例(23.8%)达PR,10例(47.6%)SD,有效率为23.8%;BSC组24例中,5例(20.8%)SD,无CR和PR者。两组比较差异有显著性(P=0.017)。GEM组无Ⅲ～Ⅳ度不良反应。GEM组中位生存时间125天,BSC组中位生存时间73天。1年生存率分别为14.3%和8.3%,无统计学差异(P>0.05)。GEM组生活质量改善57.14%,BSC组生活质量改善16.67%,两组比较有统计学差异(P<0.05)。临床受益反应(CBR)GEM组66.7%,BSC组12.5%,有统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论:国产吉西他滨单药治疗与最佳支持治疗(BSC)相比,客观有效率高,不良反应轻微,能提高晚期非小细胞肺癌患者生活质量和临床受益反应。     

晚期胰腺癌全身化疗的疗效观察

背景与目的:晚期胰腺癌是恶性程度很高的肿瘤,全身化疗是其主要的治疗方法。本研究拟观察、比较三种不同化疗方案对晚期胰腺癌的客观疗效及其临床受益反应。方法:对我科2000年2月～2001年4月期间收治的经病理检查证实的74例晚期胰腺癌患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,其中26例采用5-氟尿嘧啶、醛氢叶酸、顺铂方案治疗(A组);23例采用吉西他滨单药治疗(B组);25例采用吉西他滨联合5-氟尿嘧啶、醛氢叶酸方案治疗(C组)。采用Kaplan-Meier法分析患者生存期,Cox比例风险回归模型分析影响预后的因素。结果:A、B、C三组客观缓解率分别为7.7%、17.4%与24.0%,三组间无显著性差异(P=0.261,χ2检验);临床受益反应率分别为19.2%、47.8%与60.0%,B、C组优于A组,差异具有显著性(P<0.05,χ2检验)。A、B、C三组中位生存期分别为6.50个月(95%CI=5.00,7.99)、8.03个月(95%CI=6.72,9.35)、8.79个月(95%CI=7.31,10.26),B、C组长于A组,差异有显著性(Breslow=8.85,P=0.0119)。三组间血液学毒性和非血液学毒性发生率差异无显著性。结论:吉西他滨与5-氟尿嘧啶、醛氢叶酸联合作为一线方案治疗晚期胰腺癌有一定的客观缓解率,可改善患者的生活质量,患者耐受良好,值得进一步研究。     

中药联合化疗治疗晚期大肠癌的疗效观察

目的探讨中药联合化疗对晚期大肠癌的临床疗效。方法50例晚期大肠癌患者随机分为2组,治疗组(28例)采用中药联合化疗治疗,对照组(22例)采用单纯化疗,两组均采用FOLFOX方案化疗2个周期。观察两组患者的近期疗效、生活质量及不良反应。结果治疗组与对照组有效率分别为39.3%(11/28)和36.4%(8/22),(P>0.05)无显著性差异;两组患者生活质量总改善率分别为85.7%和50.0%(P≤0.05),有显著性差异,治疗组的良反应发生率低于对照组(P≤0.05),有显著性差异。结论中药联合化疗治疗晚期大肠癌在改善生活质量和减轻化疗不良反应方面有较好的效果。     

介入化疗栓塞联合腹部热疗治疗晚期胃癌的临床观察

目的:评价介入化疗栓塞联合射频热疗对晚期胃癌的治疗效果.方法:回顾性分析70例晚期胃癌患者的临床资料,按治疗方法分为介入化疗栓塞联合射频热疗组(A组)与单纯介入化疗栓塞组(B组),观察比较临床症状、影像学、肿瘤标志的变化,以及毒副反应与生存期的差异.结果:术后两组临床症状、影像学和肿瘤标志均有显著改善,且A组优于B组(P<0.05).两组1、2、3年生存期分别为100.0%、90.1%、75.0%和100.0%,81.6%、44.7%,差异有统计学意义,P<0.05.两组均无严重并发症发生,差异无统计学意义,P>0.05.结论:介入栓塞化疗联合射频热疗能显著提高晚期胃癌患者的疗效,延长生存期,安全性高.     

纤维连接蛋白诱导CIK细胞治疗晚期癌症患者的安全性及疗效评价

目的:评价重组人纤维连接蛋白(RetroNectin,RN)诱导的CIK细胞治疗晚期癌症患者的安全性及疗效.方法:观察85例晚期癌症患者,经RN诱导的自体或异体血CIK细胞治疗的安全性.选择晚期非小细胞肺癌患者36例,分为2组:CIK细胞治疗组20例,化疗组16例,比较两组治疗前后的免疫功能、生活质量(用汉化生活量表QLICP系统测试)、临床疗效差异;选择晚期非小细胞肺癌患者32例,分为CIK细胞治疗组及姑息治疗组各16例,比较两组患者的生存期.结果:安全性:自体及异体CIK细胞治疗过程中主要出现兴奋感、失眠、低热,未见明显毒副反应.近期疗效:20例患者经CIK细胞治疗:PR 1例,SD 10例,PD 9例,ORR 5.00%,DCR 55.00%;16例患者经化疗:PR 5例,SD 5例,PD 6例,ORR 31.25%,DCR62.50%,2组的DCR差异不显著(P>0.05),但化疗组的ORR明显高于CIK组(P<0.05).在生活质量方面,化疗后病人心理模块中情绪方面明显低落(P<0.05),CIK细胞治疗的患者多有生活质量提高;CIK细胞治疗组与化疗组患者,治疗前后免疫功能无显著差异(P>0.05).CIK细胞治疗组(11.0个月)比姑息治疗组(6.0个月)中位生存期延长,但总生存时间无统计差异(x2=2.301,P=0.129).结论:RN诱导的CIK细胞自体及异体治疗均简便、安全、有效,可以改善晚期肿瘤病人的生活质量,延长生存期.     

奥曲肽治疗晚期原发性肝癌的临床观察

目的:观察生长抑素类似物奥曲肽治疗晚期原发性肝癌的临床疗效.方法:将44例晚期原发性肝癌患者分为治疗组与对照组,治疗组20例,使用奥曲肽0.1mg,皮下注射,每12小时1次,至病情有进展时停药;对照组24例,仅接受支持治疗.每1个月进行1次疗效评价,比较两组疗效.结果:治疗组中无CR,3例PR,2例NC,15例PD.总有效率为15%.对照组中无CR、PR,4例NC,20例PD.总有效率为0.两组有显著性差异( P<0.05) .治疗组中位生存期为7.5个月,对照组中位生存期为2.5个月,有显著性差异( P<0.05) .治疗组中位TTP为5个月,对照组为2.5个月,有显著性差异( P<0.05).治疗组生活质量较对照组有明显提高 ( P<0.05),上消化道出血的发生率治疗组较对照组明显减少.结论:奥曲肽可延长晚期原发性肝癌患者的生存期,提高生活质量.     

NO和NP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的前瞻随机研究

背景与目的:草酸铂(oxaliplatin,LOHP)是治疗非小细胞肺癌(non鄄smallcelllungcancer,NSCLC)有效的药物,其胃肠道反应、肾和骨髓毒性较轻;顺铂(cisplatin,DDP)联合异长春花碱(vinorelbine,NVB)组成的NP方案是治疗NSCLC一线方案。本研究旨在比较草酸铂联合NVB组成的NO方案与NP方案治疗晚期NSCLC的近期疗效、远期疗效和不良反应。方法:将90例晚期NSCLC患者随机分为NO组(58例)和NP组(32例),NO方案:LOHP130mg/m2静滴,第1天,NVB25mg/m2静注,第1、8天;NP方案:DDP50mg/m2静滴,第2、3天,NBV用法同NO方案。观察各组的近期疗效、远期疗效、不良反应和生存情况。结果:NO组和NP组的有效率分别为33.33%和34.45%,无显著性差异(P>0.05);两组的临床受益率分别为80.70%和64.52%,有显著性差异(P<0.05);NO组的肿瘤进展时间(TTP)、中位缓解期、中位生存期、1年生存率分别为17周、21周、39周、37.93%,NP组分别为15周、19周、37周、31.25%,两组间各项指标均无显著性差异(P>0.05)。NO组和NP组静脉炎发生率分别为77.59%和50.00%,有显著性差异(P<0.01);Ⅰ～Ⅱ度周围神经炎发生率分别为43.10%和15.63%,有显著性差异(P<0.01);Ⅲ～Ⅳ度恶心/呕吐发生率分别为3.45%和31.25%,有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:NO与NP方案治疗晚期NSCLC疗效相似,NO方案临床受益率较高,耐受性较好,更易为患者所接受,可以作为治疗晚期NSCLC的一线化疗方案。     

Chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gallbladder cancer

OBJECTIVE: To clarify the role of chemotherapy for advanced gallbladder cancer (GBC). METHODS: We reviewed 89 GBC patients: 21 admitted before 1997 were treated with a combination of cisplatin, epirubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (CEF); 25, admitted subsequently, received a combination of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin and mitomycin (FAM), and the remaining 43, ineligible for these trials, received supportive care. We investigated the relation between pretreatment clinical variables and long-term survival in these 89 subjects, and analyzed whether chemotherapy could favor longer survival. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in survival time between the chemotherapy groups, whereas the response rate to the CEF regimen was 4-fold higher than to the FAM regimen (32 vs. 8%). Subgroup analysis suggested that chemotherapy favored longer survival in patients with a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1, but not in patients with a PS of 2. Cox regression analysis suggested a significant hazard reduction by chemotherapy in patients with a PS of 0 or 1, but not in patients with a PS of 2. CONCLUSIONS: GBC patients with poor PS should not be treated with chemotherapy at present. It is essential to design good clinical trials and develop more effective chemotherapy regimens.     

A multi-center retrospective analysis of survival benefits of chemotherapy for unresectable biliary tract cancer

BACKGROUND: This study examined the effect of five systemic chemotherapy regimens on survival in patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer (BTC) as compared with the best supportive care (BSC). METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed data from 413 consecutive patients with BTC who were seen at any of nine central hospitals in Japan between April 2000 and March 2003. Patients were eligible if they had intra- or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or gallbladder cancer with no prior chemotherapy. Hazard ratios of treatment regimens were estimated using the Cox proportional hazard model and the propensity score method. RESULTS: Three-hundred and four patients were enrolled: 125 (41.1%) received BSC and 179 (58.9%) took chemotherapy. Of those who received chemotherapy, 58 (19.1%) took gemcitabine (GEM), 45 (14.5%) took a cisplatin (CDDP)-based regimen, 30 (9.9%) took a 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based regimen, 27 (8.9%) took 5-FU + doxorubicin + mitomycin (FAM) and 20 (6.6%) took S-1. The response rate was 8.4% (n = 15). The CDDP-based regimen was associated with a high frequency of toxicity symptoms. The adjusted hazard ratio for GEM in the Cox regression was 0.53 (95% CI 0.34-0.82) and the hazard ratio for the CDDP-based regimen was 0.49 (95% CI 0.36-0.99). CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy with GEM may benefit patients with BTC.     

Cisplatin and gemcitabine first-line chemotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine or best supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a phase III trial

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this randomized phase III study was to show significant difference in median time to progression (TTP) in patients with advanced NSCLC treated with single-agent gemcitabine maintenance therapy versus best supportive care following gemcitabine plus cisplatin initial first-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemonaive patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8) plus cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) (day 1) every 21 days. Patients achieving objective response or disease stabilization following initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin therapy were randomized (2:1 fashion) to receive maintenance gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days) plus best supportive care (GEM arm), or best supportive care only (BSC arm). RESULTS: Between November 1999 and November 2002, we enrolled 352 patients (median age: 57 years; stage IV disease: 74%; Karnofsky performance status (KPS) >80: 41%). Following initial therapy, 206 patients were randomized and treated with gemcitabine (138) or best supportive care (68). TTP throughout the study period was 6.6 and 5 months for GEM and BSC arms, respectively, while values for the maintenance period were 3.6 and 2.0 months (for p < 0.001 for both). Median overall survival (OS) throughout study was 13.0 months for GEM and 11.0 months for BSC arms (p = 0.195). The toxicity profile was mild, with neutropenia being most common grade 3/4 toxicities. CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy with gemcitabine, following initial therapy with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, was feasible, and produced significantly longer TTP compared to best supportive care alone. Further studies are warranted to establish the place of maintenance chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.     

A retrospective analysis of second-line chemotherapy or best supportive care in patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) enrolled in first-line chemotherapy trials conducted by our group with respect to receiving or not receiving subsequent treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from 634 patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC treated with platinum and nonplatinum agent-based first-line regimens. Patient survival was calculated from the day of registration to first-line chemotherapy trials (OS1) as well as from the day of first-line treatment failure or the initiation of second-line chemotherapy (OS2) until death. The decision for administering second-line chemotherapy was, in all cases, at the discretion of the physician. Two hundred twenty-four patients (35.3%) received second-line chemotherapy (second-line group) in the context of second-line clinical trials run by the same group, and 410 (64.7%) received best supportive care (BSC group). There were significant differences between second-line and BSC groups in terms of age, histology, early discontinuation of first-line chemotherapy, and performance status after first-line treatment. RESULTS: Three (1.3%) complete and 25 (11.2%) partial responses to second-line chemotherapy were observed for an overall response rate of 12.5% (95% confidence interval, 8.2%-16.8%). The median OS1 was 13 months and 7 months (P < 0.001) and the OS2, 7 months and 3 months (P < 0.001) for the second-line and BSC groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that good performance status, disease stage IIIB, response to first-line treatment, and late termination of first-line chemotherapy were significantly associated with increased survival. The administration of second-line chemotherapy was also independently correlated with better outcome. CONCLUSION: The second-line chemotherapy and BSC groups represent different populations of patients with NSCLC. Factors indicative of increased probability of survival could be used to identify the subgroup of patients most likely to benefit from second-line chemotherapy.     

Survival of Mesothelioma in a Palliative Medical Care Unit in Egypt

Background: This study was to evaluate the survival of patients with pleural and intraperitoneal malignantmesothelioma and to investigate the efficacy of chemotherapy (CT) as well as radiotherapy (RTH) and surgerycompared to best supportive care (BSC). Materials and Methods: Forty patients with malignant mesothelioma(38 with pleural and 2 with intraperitoneal) were enrolled. Twenty seven patients underwent (CT) chemotherapyof which 2 also received (RTH) and surgery was only for biopsy in 15/40. Combination chemotherapy includedcisplatin-gemcitabine, cisplatin-navelbine and cisplatin (or carboplatin) with premetrexed. Thirteen patientsreceived only best supportive care. Results: A total of 12 (30%) patients were male, and 28 (70%) female. Medianage was 54.0 years and the male/female ratio was 1/2.33 (P=0.210). Residential exposure played a major role intwo regions, Helwan and Shoubra, in 20% and 15%, respectively. Overall mean survival time was 13.9±2.29months. That for patients who had received best supportive care was 7.57±1.85 months, for chemotherapy was16.5±3.20 months, and multimodality treatment regimen 27±21.0 months (P=0.028). Kaplan-Meier survival didnot significantly vary for sex, residence and the pathological types epithelial, mixed and sarcomatous. The mediansurvival for performance status and treatment modalities was significant (P=0.001 and 0.028). Best supportivecare using opioids with a mean dose of 147.1 mg (range 0-1680) of morphine sulphate produced good subjectiveresponse and reasonable quality of life but did not affect survival. Conclusions: We conclude that CT prolongssurvival compared to BSC in patients with malignant mesothelioma. Moreover, using escalating doses of opioidsprovides good pain relief and subjective responses.     

A retrospective analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma patients treated either with chemotherapy or best supportive care between 1990 and 2005 A single institution experience

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety profile of chemotherapy (CT) compared to best supportive care (BSC) in patients with histopathologically confirmed diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma (DMPM). A total of 161 patients between 1990 and 2004 treated either with CT (109 patients) or BSC (52 patients) depending on patients choice were evaluated in this analyses. Chemotherapy protocols included a combination of cisplatin, mitomycin C and recombinant interferon alpha 2a (CM-In), or cisplatin, mitomycin C and ifosfamide (CMI), or cisplatin and gemcitabine (CG). We found a significant difference in the median survivals of the patients with CT compared to BSC, 11.3 months versus 8.0. Objective response rate was 28/109 (25.7%) with 3.7% of complete response rate. Stable disease rate was 39/109 (35.8%). There was a significant difference between median survivals of patients with objective response (17 months) and median survivals of patients with progressive diseases (6 months) and also with stable diseases (16 months). There was a significant difference between the stable disease and the progressive disease. Stages 3 and 4 patients of epithelial cell type having received chemotherapy live longer than those not having received chemotherapy (12 months versus 4). There was no significant difference between the survivals of the different chemotherapy regimens. The toxicity with CT regimens were mild and well-tolerated. We conclude that CT prolongs survival compared to BSC in patients with DMPM. Survivals of patients with objective response prolong considerably with CT compared BSC. We observed that stages 3 and 4 patients with epithelial cell type got benefit from CT. Especially, of epithelial cell type stages 1 and 2 should receive multimodal treatment.     

Subsequent Chemotherapy Improves Survival Outcome in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Acquired Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Resistance

BackgroundEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) provide promising effect against non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although most tumors acquire resistance. Our objective was to assess the survival outcome of patients with NSCLC with or without subsequent chemotherapy after acquired TKI resistance.Patients and MethodsA total of 114 patients with pathologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC who had had disease control with TKIs were retrospectively reviewed. After acquired TKI resistance, patients received either best supportive care (BSC) only or BSC plus subsequent chemotherapy. Both groups were well balanced in regard to performance status, age, sex, histology subtype, and smoking status.ResultsSixty-seven patients (58.8%) received subsequent chemotherapy, and 47 patients (41.2%) received BSC only. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from the time of TKI resistance in the subsequent-chemotherapy group (11.2 months and 3.5 months, respectively) were longer than those of the BSC group (3.8 months and 1.5 months, respectively; P < .01). Patients who subsequently received taxane-based chemotherapy exhibited higher a response rate and disease control rate (48.7% and 79.5%, respectively) than patients treated with a nontaxane regimen (21.4% and 53.5%, respectively; P < .05). Overall survival and PFS in patients after taxane-based subsequent chemotherapy (12.7 months and 5.1 months, respectively) were longer than those of patients given a nontaxane regimen (7 months and 1.8 months, respectively; P < .01).ConclusionThis study suggests that acquired TKI resistance should be managed aggressively. The higher antitumor response and survival outcome with a taxane-based regimen in this retrospective study could encourage further prospective investigation to confirm the efficacy of taxane over nontaxane chemotherapy in patients with NSCLC whose disease progresses with EGFR TKI treatment.     

Efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy with 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine in locally advanced biliary tract cancer

Purpose

There is no established standard treatment for patients with locally advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC).

Methods

We analyzed the treatment results of locally advanced BTC from Jan 1995 to Dec 2010 at single institution of South Korea with retrospective study. One hundred and seventy-six patients were eligible to investigate the treatment response and toxicity. We treated these patients with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- or gemcitabine (GEM)-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or best supportive care (BSC). The primary end point was overall survival.

Results

Of these locally advanced BTC patients, 106 patients received CCRT and 70 patients were treated with BSC. The median overall survival was 42.57 weeks (95 % confidence interval [CI], 35.85–49.30) in CCRT group and 13.29 weeks (95 % CI 10.42–16.15) in BSC group (P < 0.001). Nausea and anemia were the most common toxicities observed.

Conclusions

Patients with locally advanced BTC who were treated with 5-FU-based or GEM-based CCRT seem to have a better survival than those who received BSC. The treatment-related toxicity was mild. GEM-based or 5-FU-based CCRT showed similar survival advantages.