Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Advanced Gallbladder Cancer: Do We have Enough Evidence? A Systematic Review

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Recently for advanced gallbladder carcinoma, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has emerged as an important strategy in place of adjuvant chemotherapy with the hope that it will help to improve the resectability and survival. AIM AND OBJECTIVE: The goal was to conduct a systematic review of published publications on the benefits of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gallbladder cancer treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review followed the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology standards. The clinical benefit rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, curative resectability rate, and R0 resection were the major outcomes of interest. The secondary outcomes of interest were overall and disease-free survival. RESULTS: = 420). One-hundred and twenty-eight cases (30.47%) despite receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy had disease progression. Although 67.38% of patients (283 of 420) in this systematic review showed good response to the neoadjuvant chemotherapy, just 51.66% (217 of 420 cases) were operated, out of which only 171 cases were deemed to be feasible for surgical resection and had curative resection. Out of the cases that underwent curative surgery, 91.81% had R0 resection (157 out of 171 patients). The overall survival rate was found to be 18.5-50.1 months for patients in whom curative surgery was done and 5.0-10.8 months for nonsurgery patients. CONCLUSION: No sufficient data exist to advocate the regular use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gallbladder carcinoma, as data showed that only 1/3 of patients benefited and had a R0 resection. Further research should be the randomized controlled trials to further quantify the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gallbladder carcinoma. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: . Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Advanced Gallbladder Cancer: Do We have Enough Evidence? A Systematic Review. Euroasian J Hepato-Gastroenterol 2021;11(2):87-94.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.