Efficacy, safety and differential outcomes of immune‐chemotherapy with gemcitabine, cisplatin and durvalumab in patients with biliary tract cancers: A multicenter real world cohort

Abstract Background Combined Immuno‐chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine, cisplatin and the programmed death‐ligand one inhibitor durvalumab (GCD) is the new standard of care for patients with biliary tract cancers (BTC) based on positive results of the TOPAZ‐1 study. Objective We here evaluated the efficacy and safety of GCD for BTC in a German multicenter real‐world patient cohort. Methods Patients with BTC treated with GCD from 9 German centers were included. Clinicopathological baseline parameters, overall survival (OS), response rate and adverse events (AEs) were retrospectively analyzed. The prognostic impact was determined by Kaplan–Meier analyses and Cox regression models. Results A total of 165 patients treated with GCD between 2021 and 2024 were included in the study. Median OS and median progression‐free survival were 14 months (95% CI 10.3–17.7) and 8 months (95% CI 6.8–9.2), respectively. The best overall response rate was 28.5% and disease control rate was 65.5%. While extrahepatic and intrahepatic BTC showed similar outcomes, mOS was significantly shorter in patients with gall bladder cancer (GB‐CA) with 9 months (95% CI 5.5–12.4; p = 0.02). In univariate analyses age ≥70 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) ≥1, status post cholecystectomy, GB‐CA and high baseline CRP values were significantly associated with OS. ECOG PS ≥ 1 and GB‐CA remained independent prognostic factors for OS in multivariable cox regression analysis. AEs have been reported in 130 patients (78.8%), including 149 grade 3–4 AEs (25.5%). One patient died of severe infectious pneumonia. Immune‐related (ir)AEs occurred in 17 patients (10.3%), including 9 grade 3–4 irAEs (2.2%), which led to treatment interruption in 4 patients. Conclusions Immuno‐chemotherapy in patients with BTC was feasible, effective and safe in a real‐life scenario. Our results were comparable to the phase 3 clinical trial results (TOPAZ‐1). Reduced efficacy was noted in patients with GB‐CA and/or a reduced performance status that warrants further investigation.