RESUMO
Background: A systematic review was conducted to understand clinical, economic and health-related quality-of-life outcomes in second-line biliary tract cancer. Materials & methods: The review followed established recommendations. The feasibility of network meta-analysis revealed limited networks, thus synthesis was limited to a summary of reported ranges, percentiles and medians. Results: The review included 62 trials and observational studies highly variable with respect to key baseline characteristics. Commonly evaluated second-line treatments included fluoropyrimidine-, gemcitabine- and S-1-based regimens. Across active treatment arms, median overall survival ranged from 3.5 to 15.0 months (median: 6.9), median progression-free survival from 1.4 to 6.5 months (median: 2.9) and objective response from 0 to 36.4%. Outcomes were similar between study types, with a few notable outliers. Treatment-related/emergent adverse events were infrequently reported; no studies reported economic or health-related quality-of-life outcomes. Conclusions: Biliary tract cancer is a difficult-to-treat disease with poor prognosis. Despite evolving treatment landscapes, more recent studies did not show clinical outcome improvement, highlighting an unmet need among advanced/metastatic patients.
A systematic review of published literature was undertaken to understand the clinical, economic and health-related quality-of-life impact of second-line biliary tract cancer (BTC). A total of 62 relevant studies were identified. The patient populations included across these studies were highly variable with respect to key patient characteristics (i.e., age, sex, physical functioning and tumor type). Commonly evaluated treatments included fluoropyrimidine-, gemcitabine- and S-1-based regimens. Reported values for key outcomes varied substantially, somewhat explained by a few outlier studies. Median overall survival ranged from 3.5 to 15.0 months, median progression-free survival from 1.4 to 6.5 months and objective response from 0 to 36.4%. Treatment-related/emergent adverse events were infrequently reported; no studies reported economic or health-related quality-of-life outcomes. The results demonstrate that BTC is a difficult-to-treat disease with poor prognosis. Despite evolving treatment landscapes, more recent studies did not show clinical outcome improvement, highlighting an unmet need among advanced/metastatic second-line BTC patients.
