TY - JOUR
T1 - Treatment of borderline cases for curative resection of biliary tract cancer
AU - Kobayashi, Shogo
AU - Nagano, Hiroaki
AU - Marubashi, Shigeru
AU - Wada, Hiroshi
AU - Eguchi, Hidetoshi
AU - Takeda, Yutaka
AU - Tanemura, Masahiro
AU - Umeshita, Koji
AU - Doki, Yuichiro
AU - Mori, Masaki
PY - 2011/10
Y1 - 2011/10
N2 - Background and Aim To dissect the high rate of non-curative resection associated with biliary tract caner, we compared the outcome of non-curative resection with that of inoperable cancer in patients referred for surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 447 patients with biliary tract cancer who were referred to our hospital between 1970 and 2008. We compared the background and overall survival (OS) rates accordingly to surgery (curative resection, non-curative resection, or no surgery "inoperable") and alternative therapies (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy). Results The 3-year OS rate was 19% for the non-curative resection group (n = 72) and 2% for the inoperable group (n = 135, P<0.0001). Among the inoperable cases, the 3-year OS rate for patient who received chemotherapy, including gemcitabine (GEM), was 18% (n = 18), which was similar to that of patients of the non-curative resection who were treated with GEM (P = 0.7379). There were no significant differences in survival between non-curative resection without GEM and inoperable cases with GEM-based chemotherapy. Conclusion Our results indicate that the prognosis of patients who undergo non-curative surgery is better than those with inoperable cancer, but similar to those who receive chemotherapy including GEM.
AB - Background and Aim To dissect the high rate of non-curative resection associated with biliary tract caner, we compared the outcome of non-curative resection with that of inoperable cancer in patients referred for surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 447 patients with biliary tract cancer who were referred to our hospital between 1970 and 2008. We compared the background and overall survival (OS) rates accordingly to surgery (curative resection, non-curative resection, or no surgery "inoperable") and alternative therapies (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy). Results The 3-year OS rate was 19% for the non-curative resection group (n = 72) and 2% for the inoperable group (n = 135, P<0.0001). Among the inoperable cases, the 3-year OS rate for patient who received chemotherapy, including gemcitabine (GEM), was 18% (n = 18), which was similar to that of patients of the non-curative resection who were treated with GEM (P = 0.7379). There were no significant differences in survival between non-curative resection without GEM and inoperable cases with GEM-based chemotherapy. Conclusion Our results indicate that the prognosis of patients who undergo non-curative surgery is better than those with inoperable cancer, but similar to those who receive chemotherapy including GEM.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052429730&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80052429730&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jso.21971
DO - 10.1002/jso.21971
M3 - Article
C2 - 21538362
AN - SCOPUS:80052429730
VL - 104
SP - 499
EP - 503
JO - Journal of Surgical Oncology
JF - Journal of Surgical Oncology
SN - 0022-4790
IS - 5
ER -