Abstract 96P
Background
To compare the doublet gemcitabine and cisplatin which is a standard of care in locally advanced or metastatic gall bladder cancer to a triplet gemcitabine, cisplatin and nab paclitaxel regime which has shown promising results in a single arm phase II study.
Methods
A total of 60 patients with locally advanced or metastatic gall bladder cancer were randomized 30 in each arm after imaging [contrast enhanced CT scan of chest, abdomen, and pelvis / MRI abdomen and pelvis with CECT chest /whole-body PET CT scan] and biopsy. Arm A received two drugs gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 i.v and cisplatin 25mg/m2 i.v on Day1 and Day8 of 21-day cycle and arm B received three drugs gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 , cisplatin, 25 mg/m2 , and nab-paclitaxel, 125 mg/m2 , on days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycle. Evaluation was done post 3 and 6 cycles of chemotherapy. Then patients were followed up every 6 months for 2 years period for assessment of primary and secondary endpoints of the study.
Results
The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (arm A) showed an overall radiological response rate (complete response and partial response) of 13.3% while it was 61.9 % in patients who received gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel. This difference was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.004. The median progression-free survival for the patients who received gemcitabine and cisplatin was 4.5 months (95% CI, 4.0-4.9) vs 7.6 months (95% CI, 3.9-11.2) for the patients who were treated with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel. This difference was statistically significant with a p-value of ≤ 0.05. The median overall survival for the doublet was 9.2 months (95% CI 2.6-15.7) vs not reached for the patients who were treated with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel. There was no increase in grade 3 adverse events with the addition of nab-paclitaxel.
Conclusions
To conclude, our study showed that the triplet chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin and nab-paclitaxel was significantly better in terms of overall response rate, and median progression-free survival with a longer follow up needed to comment on median overall survival.
Clinical trial identification
CTRI/2021/09/036362.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
C. Khatri.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
127P - Prognostic significance of intratumoral and peritumoral budding in distal extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma
Presenter: Sun-Young Jun
Session: Poster session 17
128P - Biliary tract cancers: Epidemiological and prognosis trends of Latin American population
Presenter: Maria del Consuelo Diaz Romero
Session: Poster session 17
129P - Prognostic factors associated with survival in resected biliary tract cancers: A multicentre Italian experience
Presenter: Michele Ghidini
Session: Poster session 17
663P - Safety and preliminary efficacy of the KRAS G12C Inhibitor MK-1084 in solid tumors and in combination with pembrolizumab in NSCLC
Presenter: Carlos Rojas
Session: Poster session 17
664P - Final results of a phase I/II study of combined BCL-xL and MEK inhibition with navitoclax and trametinib in KRAS or NRAS mutant advanced solid tumors
Presenter: Ryan Corcoran
Session: Poster session 17
666P - Updated efficacy and safety data of entrectinib in patients (pts) with locally advanced/metastatic NTRK fusion-positive (fp) solid tumours
Presenter: Shun Lu
Session: Poster session 17
667P - Efficacy and safety of larotrectinib (laro) as first-line treatment for patients (pts) with tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion cancer
Presenter: David Hong
Session: Poster session 17
668P - Efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in a pooled analysis of patients (Pts) with tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion cancer
Presenter: Alexander Drilon
Session: Poster session 17