Consolidation hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced stage ovarian carcinoma: a 3 year experience

Combined Interval Cytoreductive Surgery and Carboplatin-Based Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Advanced Primary High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer

Combining interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improves survival in advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC). Although limited, growing evidence regarding carboplatin-based HIPEC highlights its potential. This retrospective study included all patients with advanced primary high-grade serous ovarian cancer who underwent interval CRS combined with carboplatin-based HIPEC at our Canadian tertiary care center between 2014 and 2020. We identified 40 patients with a median age of 61 years. The median peritoneal cancer index was 13 and complete cytoreduction was achieved in 38 patients (95%). Median hospital stay was 13 days and there were four admissions to the intensive care unit (10%) and six readmissions (15%). Severe adverse events occurred in eight patients (20%) and there was no perioperative death. Recurrence was seen in 33 patients (82%) with a median DFS of 18.0 months and a median overall survival of 36.4 months. Multivariate analyses showed that age, peritoneal cancer index, completeness of cytoreduction, occurrence of severe complications, and bowel resection did not significantly impact DFS or OS in our cohort. Interval CRS combined with carboplatin-based HIPEC for advanced primary EOC is associated with acceptable morbidity and oncological outcomes. Larger studies are required to determine the long-term outcomes.

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): New Approaches and Controversies on the Treatment of Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after cytoreductive surgery has been extensively studied in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, and it holds promise as a therapeutic strategy, but its role remains elusive. The aim of this study was to assess the existing evidence for the use or not of HIPEC in primary debulking surgery (PDS), interval debulking surgery (IDS), and recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC), evaluated in terms of survival rates and post-surgical morbidity.

METHODS

Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane, and Medscape were systematically searched for any article comparing the use of HIPEC treatment with any other therapy in patients with ovarian cancer in PDS, IDS, and ROC. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed. We only considered English-language published studies.

RESULTS

We included 14 studies, including two RCTs with a total of 1813 women, published between 2003 and 2023 with a recruitment period between 1998 and 2020. In PDS, there were no differences in progression-free survival (PFS) between HIPEC and controls [MD -5.53 months [95% CI -19.91 to 8.84 months]; I2 = 96%]. Conversely, in patients treated with NACT, pooled results showed a significant survival advantage in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the combined HIPEC plus IDS group rather than surgery alone [PFS: MD 4.68 months (95% CI 3.49 to 5.86 months, I2 = 95%); OS: MD 11.81 months (95% CI 9.34 to 14.27 months); I2 = 97%]. Concerning ROC patients, pooled MD did not show either a significant PFS difference between intervention and controls [MD 2.68 months (95% CI 433 to 9.70 months); I2 = 95%], and OS significant difference (MD 6.69 months [95% CI -9.09 to 22.47 months]; I2 = 98%). Severe post-operative complications (≥grade 3) were available in 10 studies, accounting for 1108 women. Overall, there was a slightly but significantly increased risk with the combined approach compared to controls [RR 1.26 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.55); I2 = 0%].

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of HIPEC with cytoreductive surgery prolongs OS and PFS in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after NACT with acceptable morbidity. However, additional trials are still needed to determine the effectiveness of HIPEC in primary and recurrence settings. In the era of personalized medicine, the correlation between the efficacy of HIPEC and biological and molecular findings represents a challenge for the future of ovarian cancer.

Ten-year treatment outcomes of consolidation hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer (HIPEC-KOV-03R)

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of consolidation hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent second-look surgery either with or without HIPEC after having complete or partial response to primary cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy between January 1991 and December 2003 at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital. The 10-year progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity within postoperative 28 days were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were identified, 44 (50.6%) received second-look surgery with HIPEC whereas 43 (49.4%) received only second-look surgery. The 10-year PFS and OS were significantly longer in the HIPEC group compared with the control group (PFS, 53.6% vs. 34.9%, log-rank p=0.009; OS, 57.0% vs. 34.5%, log-rank p=0.025). Multivariable analysis identified HIPEC as an independent favorable prognostic factor for PFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]=0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.23-0.77; p=0.005) but not for OS (adjusted HR=0.58; 95% CI=0.32-1.07; p=0.079). The more common adverse events in the HIPEC group were thrombocytopenia (90.9% vs. 68.3%, p=0.005), elevated liver enzymes (65.9% vs. 29.3%, p=0.002), and wound complications (18.2% vs. 2.4%, p=0.032). However, these adverse events were reversible and did not delay subsequent consolidation chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

The consolidation HIPEC demonstrated a significant improvement in 10-year PFS but not OS, with acceptable toxicity in patients with primary epithelial ovarian cancer. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these results.

Role of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Combined with Cytoreductive Surgery as Consolidation Therapy for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer who undergo incomplete surgery followed by six cycles of chemotherapy could benefit from second-look or consolidation cytoreductive surgery (CCRS). The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing complete CCRS and the factors affecting survival. The secondary goal was to study the benefit of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 173 patients with CCRS with (n = 118) or without (n = 55) HIPEC treated at 12 French centers. Only patients having a completeness of cytoreduction (CC) 0/1 resection and a minimum of 5 years of follow-up were included. HIPEC was performed systematically for all patients except those treated at the four centers that did not perform HIPEC.

RESULTS

The median Peritoneal Cancer Index was 6 (range 0-33). Closed HIPEC was performed in 59 (34.1%) patients and open HIPEC was performed in 56 (32.3%) patients. Grade 3-4 complications occurred in 64 (36.9%) patients. The median OS was 35.67 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 29.8-46.1) and was significantly longer for CCRS + HIPEC (31.4 months without HIPEC and 42.5 months with HIPEC; p = 0.022). On multivariate analysis, closed HIPEC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.73; p < 0.001) resulted in a longer OS, and age > 65 years (HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.14-4.11; p = 0.018) and bowel resection (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.27-3.08; p = 0.020) led to a shorter OS. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, closed HIPEC (odds ratio 0.18; p = 0.001) was associated with a lower risk of dying at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

CCRS was performed with an acceptable morbidity and resulted in good overall survival. The role of HIPEC in addition to CCRS should be evaluated in prospective, randomized studies and the closed technique prospectively compared with the open technique.

Prognostic value and adverse events of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in primary advanced and platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The original meta-analysis of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is already outdated, owing to the latest trial results. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and adverse events of cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC compared to conventional therapy for advanced and platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, phase II/III controlled trials regarding 'HIPEC' and 'ovarian cancer' were searched for in electronic databases from inception to March 2022.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. The pooled hazard ratio [HR] in the HIPEC group for progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.83, p = .002) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.51-0.82, p < .001) were improved in the HIPEC group compared with the non-HIPEC group. For primary advanced disease, OS and PFS were significantly increased in patients receiving interval debulking surgery + HIPEC, whereas PFS was not significantly different between primary debulking surgery (PDS) + HIPEC and PDS alone. For platinum-sensitive recurrent disease, no correlation was observed for PFS and OS between the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups (p < .05). The incidence of procedure-related complications was higher in the HIPEC group than in the non-HIPEC group (odds ratio = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.24-3.01, p < .01). The morbidity of leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, hypoalbuminemia, and grades III-IV electrolyte disturbance was higher in the HIPEC group than in the non-HIPEC group. However, HIPEC administration reduced the risk of intra-abdominal bleeding and constipation.

CONCLUSION

HIPEC-based regimens improved the clinical prognosis for primary advanced OC, whereas no significant value was elicited for recurrent OC.

Effectiveness of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Associated with Cytoreductive Surgery in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer remains controversial. Our study aims to analyze the overall survival and disease-free survival for the use of HIPEC as a treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out using PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of six studies were used, comprising a total of 674 patients.

RESULTS

The results of our meta-analysis of all studies analyzed together (observational and randomized controlled trials (RCT)) did not achieve significant results. Contrary to the OS (HR = 0.56, 95% IC = 0.33-0.95, p = 0.03) and DFS (HR = 0.61, 95% IC = 0.43-0.86, p < 0.01) of the RCT analyzed separately, a clear impact on survival was suggested. The subgroup analysis showed that studies making use of higher temperatures (≥42 °C) for a shorter period of time (≤60 min) achieved better results for both OS and DFS, as well as the use of cisplatin as the form of chemotherapy in HIPEC. Moreover, the use of HIPEC did not increase high-grade complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of HIPEC to cytoreductive surgery demonstrates an improvement in OS and DFS for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer in advanced stages, without an increase in the number of complications. The use of cisplatin as chemotherapy in HIPEC obtained better results.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The value of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) at the time of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is controversial and its use remains experimental in most national and international guidelines. We wished to systematically evaluate all available evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of data from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted from the first report on HIPEC in EOC till April 3, 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the HIPEC and control groups. This meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265810).

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (10 case-control studies and 5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) were included in the present meta-analysis. Based on the time interval between the last systemic chemotherapy exposure and timing of CRS +/- HIPEC, all studies and patients' cohorts we classified into recent (<6 months; n = 9 studies/patients cohorts) and non-recent (≥6 months, n = 8 studies/patients cohorts) chemotherapy exposure groups. In the recent chemotherapy exposure group, HIPEC was associated with improvement of both PFS (HR, 0.585; 95% CI, 0.422-0.811) and OS (HR, 0.519; 95% CI, 0.346-0.777). On the contrary, in the non-recent chemotherapy exposure group, HIPEC failed to significantly affect PFS (HR, 1.037; 95% CI, 0.684-1.571) or OS (HR, 0.932; 95% CI, 0.607-1.430). Consistent results were observed in subsequent sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our present meta-analysis demonstrates that the value of HIPEC at CRS for EOC appears to depend on the timing of the last systemic chemotherapy exposure. Future trials are awaited to define the role of HIPEC in EOC.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy as consolidation treatment of advanced stage ovarian cancer

Objective

To investigate the therapeutic efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as consolidation treatment after completing first-line treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients treated at the Comprehensive Gynecologic Cancer Center between January 2014 and 2019. Based on the inclusion criteria, 24 eligible patients who received HIPEC (paclitaxel 175 mg/m², for 90 minutes, at 42°C) (HIPEC group) as consolidation treatment after terminating the adjuvant chemotherapy were identified. Another 24 patients who met the inclusion criteria and did not receive HIPEC were matched, representing the non-HIPEC group. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were examined between the two groups.

Results

The median DFS was 28.7 and 24.2 months in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups, respectively (P=0.688). The 3-year DFS rates in the HIPEC and non-HPEC groups were 39.5% and 32.6%, respectively. However, the median OS was not determined. The 5-year OS rates in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups were 86.2% and 81.3%, respectively (P=0.850). One patient developed grade 3 neutropenia. Other patients experienced mild adverse events after HIPEC.

Conclusion

This study suggests that consolidation HIPEC could not support the survival benefit after completing the first-line treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, although no severe specific safety issues were found. Therefore, randomized trials evaluating consolidation HIPEC for the management of ovarian cancer are warranted.

Dense hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with cisplatin in patients with stage III serous epithelial ovarian cancer: a retrospective study

Background

To investigate the efficacy and safety of interval debulking surgery (IDS) combined with dense hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with cisplatin in Chinese patients with FIGO stage III serous epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Methods

This retrospective single-center study reviewed the demographic and clinical data of 197 patients with primary FIGO stage III serous EOC who were treated with IDS with (n = 121) or without (n = 76, control group) dense HIPEC between January 2012 and April 2017. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoint was the occurrence of adverse events.

Results

The median PFS was 24 months in the IDS plus dense HIPEC group, whereas it was 19 months in the IDS alone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33–0.65, p = 0.000). The median OS in patients treated with IDS plus dense HIPEC (51 months) was significantly longer than that in patients treated with IDS alone (40 months, HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.35–0.78, p = 0.001). The demographic and preoperative clinical characteristics of these two groups were comparable (p > 0.05). In the IDS alone group, no adverse events were recorded in 42 (55.3%) of the 76 patients, and 14 (18.4%) patients were reported to have grade III/IV adverse events. In the IDS plus dense HIPEC group, no adverse events were recorded in 55 (45.5%) of the 121 patients, and 23 (19.0%) patients were reported to have grade III/IV adverse events. No postoperative deaths occurred within 30 days in either group and neither did severe fatal complications in the IDS plus dense HIPEC group.

Conclusions

IDS plus dense HIPEC with cisplatin in Chinese patients with FIGO stage III serous EOC is associated with improved survival and is reasonably well tolerated by patients.

Cytoreductive Surgery plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Improves Survival with Acceptable Safety for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Clinical Study of 100 Patients

Background

The mainstay of treatment for advanced ovarian cancer is debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy that includes carboplatin and paclitaxel, but the prognosis is poor. This study is aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS+HIPEC) as first-line surgical treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC).

Methods

FIGO stage III/IV AOC patients underwent CRS+HIPEC as first-line surgical treatment at our center from December 2007 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was safety.

Results

Among 100 patients, the median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score was 80 (50-100), median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 19 (1-39), median completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score was 1 (0-3), number of organ regions removed was 4 (3-9), number of peritoneal regions removed was 4 (1-9), and number of anastomoses was 1 (0-4). The median follow-up was 36.8 months; 75 (75.0%) patients were still alive, and 25 (25.0%) had died. The median overall survival (mOS) was 87.6 (95% CI: 72.1-103.0) months, and the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates were 94.1%, 77.2%, 68.2%, 64.2%, and 64.2%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that better mOS correlated with an age ≤, KPS ≥ 80, ascites ≤ 1000 ml, PCI < 19, and CC score 0-1. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that CC was an independent factor for OS; patients who underwent CRS with a CC score 0-1 had a mPFS of 67.8 (95% CI: 48.3-87.4) months. The perioperative serious adverse event and morbidity rates were 4.0% and 2.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

CRS+HIPEC improves survival for AOC patients with acceptable safety at experienced high-volume centers. Stringent patient selection and complete CRS are key factors for better survival.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer with peritoneal metastases, systematic review of the literature and focused personal experience

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) causes 60% of ovarian cancer cases and is the fourth most common cause of death from cancer in women. The standard of care for EOC includes a combination of surgery followed by intravenous chemotherapy. Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy (CT) has been introduced into the therapeutic algorithm of EOC with positive results. To explore existing results regarding intraperitoneal chemotherapy a systematic review of the literature and an analysis of our own institutional prospective database of patients treated with cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for EOC at different stages were conducted. The focused report concerning our personal experience with advanced EOC treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC produced the following results: In 57 patients cisplatin + paclitaxel as HIPEC was the only significant factor improving overall survival (OS) at multivariate analysis (OR 6.54, 95% CI: 1.24-34.47, P=0.027). Patients treated with HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel showed a median OS of 46 months (SD 6.4, 95% CI: 33.4-58.6), while patients treated with other HIPEC regimens showed a median OS of 12 months (SD 3.1, 95% CI: 6.0-18.0). The 2y-OS was 72% and 3y-OS was 68% for cisplatin + paclitaxel as HIPEC, while the 2y- and 3y-OS was 0% for other HIPEC regimens. Patients treated with HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel showed a median disease-free survival (DFS) of 13 months (SD 1.6, 95% CI: 9.9-16.1), while patients treated with other HIPEC regimens showed a median DFS of 8 months (SD 3.1, 95% CI: 1.9-14.1). In conclusion, HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel in ovarian cancer showed positive results that may be considered semi-definitive according to the level of evidence and should be considered a starting point for further investigations. At present HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel should be proposed to patients with advanced ovarian cancer as standard treatment at almost all stages of disease. Platinum + taxane-based intraperitoneal regimens demonstrated superior results compared to other regimens.

Outcomes for Elderly Ovarian Cancer Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery Plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC)

BACKGROUND

Women 65 years of age or older with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) are thought to have a worse prognosis than younger patients. However, no consensus exists concerning the best treatment for ovarian cancer in this age group. This report presents outcomes for patients treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHODS

A prospective database of EOC patients treated with CRS/HIPEC (1998-2019) was analyzed. Perioperative variables were compared by treatment including upfront CRS/HIPEC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus CRS/HIPEC (NACT + CRS/HIPEC), and salvage CRS/HIPEC, and by age at surgery (< 65 and ≥ 65 years). Survival analysis was performed, and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 148 patients identified, 42 received upfront CRS/HIPEC, 48 received NACT + CRS/HIPEC, and 58 received salvage CRS/HIPEC. Each group was subdivided by age groups (< 65 and ≥ 65 years). The median overall survival (OS) after the upfront CRS/HIPEC was 69.2 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 69.3 months for those ≥ 65 years of age. The OS after NACT + CRS/HIPEC was 26.9 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 32.9 months for those ≥ 65 years of age, and the OS after salvage CRS/HIPEC was 45.6 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 23.9 months for those ≥ 65 years of age. The median progression-free survival (PFS) after upfront CRS/HIPEC was 41.3 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 45.4 months for those ≥ 65 years of age. The PFS after NACT + CRS/HIPEC was 16.2 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 11.2 months for those ≥ 65 years of age, and the PFS after salvage CRS/HIPEC was 18.7 months for the patients < 65 years of age versus 10 months for those ≥ 65 years of age. The median follow-up period for the entire cohort was 44.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 34.7-60.6 months].

CONCLUSION

Age and feasibility of complete cytoreduction should be considered when treatment methods are selected for elderly patients. A carefully selected elderly population can benefit significantly from aggressive treatment methods.

A Retrospective Clinical Analysis of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gynecological Cancers: Technical Details, Tolerability, and Efficacy

Objective

The aim of this study was to reveal the results of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC procedure) performed during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in patients with endometrial cancer and epithelial ovarian cancer which included mainly platinum-resistant patients.

Method

Patients who underwent CRS+HIPEC between May 2015 and January 2020 were evaluated retrospectively. Surgical complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

Results

A total of 33 CRS+HIPEC procedures were performed in 32 patients, two of whom had recurrent endometrial cancer. Of the 30 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), five underwent interval CRS+HIPEC, and remaining 25 patients underwent secondary CRS+HIPEC treatment due to relapsed disease. Eighteen of the patients with relapsed disease were platinum-resistant. The overall operative mortality and severe morbidity rates were %3 and 12%, respectively. For 30 patients with EOC, during a median follow-up period of 15 months, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a 1-year OS and PFS rates of 69.7% and 30.3%, respectively. Moreover, in the subgroup analysis of the platinum-resistant cohort, median OS and PFS were 14 and five months, respectively.

Conclusion

CRS+HIPEC procedures had acceptable severe morbidity and mortality rates. In addition, patients with recurrent EOC and without a visible residual disease at the end of cytoreductive surgery had, though not statistically significant, longer OS . HIPEC administration during CRS was not associated with adverse outcomes in the platinum-resistant EOC cohort. The short-term results of the current study are promising.

An overview and update of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

Despite, the strong rationale and evidence of the benefit of postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer, it has not been widely adopted, mainly due to its high morbidity and logistical difficulties. Intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a more tolerable and technically feasible method of intraperitoneal chemotherapy, whereas other potential advantages include homogenous drug distribution, application before tumor regrowth and combination with hyperthermia, which is directly cytotoxic and enhances the efficacy of many drugs.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors explain the rationale and indications for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC in advanced ovarian cancer. Data of major clinical studies, meta-analyses, and recent randomized trials are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

After many encouraging clinical studies and meta-analyses, a recent randomized study demonstrated survival benefit for HIPEC during interval CRS in primary ovarian cancer, without increased morbidity, whereas another implied its benefit in recurrent ovarian cancer. Results of recently completed and numerous ongoing randomized studies will further determine the benefit of HIPEC in ovarian cancer at different time points. Patient selection and appraisal of the best protocols are crucial. The field of gynecological oncology will most likely evolve to include HIPEC eventually as a routine treatment for ovarian cancer.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: The heat is on

Patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer have a high incidence of peritoneal disease recurrence despite maximal efforts to surgically remove all visible tumor plus intravenous chemotherapy. The administration of intraperitoneal chemotherapy that specifically targets the peritoneal surface has been investigated in previous trials, but questions about the design of these studies has prevented this treatment from being widely adopted in clinical practice. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a single intraoperative approach that also targets the peritoneal surface. A randomized phase 3 trial showed significant benefit in recurrence-free and overall survival when HIPEC was added to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in patients who were not eligible for primary surgery because of the extent of their disease (OVHIPEC trial; NCT00426257). The trial showed no important differences in toxicity or patient-reported outcomes between the study groups. The extent of surgery and the number of bowel resections were also similar between the 2 study groups, and the effect of HIPEC was homogeneous across the levels of predefined and post hoc subgroups. Nevertheless, the design and the results of the OVHIPEC trial were critically assessed, and this resembles the reluctance to adopt the positive results of the earlier intraperitoneal chemotherapy studies. This overview discusses the design and results of the OVHIPEC trial. The evidence that is currently available points to a clinically relevant and cost-effective benefit of HIPEC added to interval CRS for patients with stage III ovarian cancer who are not eligible for primary surgery. Ongoing collaborative research will provide further evidence regarding the role of HIPEC in ovarian cancer.

Oncologic outcomes and morbidity following heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy at cytoreductive surgery for primary epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has not been universally adopted at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery for primary epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) despite evidence of a 12-month overall survival (OS) benefit in a recent landmark randomized trial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess oncologic outcomes and perioperative morbidity following HIPEC among primary EOC patients.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from inception to August 2019, for observational and randomized studies of primary EOC patients undergoing HIPEC. We assessed risk of bias using the Institute of Health Economics Quality Appraisal Checklist for single-arm cohort studies, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for comparative cohort studies, and Cochrane Collaboration's Tool for randomized trials. We qualitatively summarized survival outcomes and calculated the pooled proportion of 30-day grade III-IV morbidity and postoperative death.

RESULTS

We identified 35 articles including 2252 primary EOC patients; one study was a randomized trial, and only six studies included a comparator group of surgery alone. The timing, temperature, and chemotherapeutic agents used for HIPEC differed across studies. Reported OS was highly variable (3-year OS range: 46-77%); three comparative cohort studies and the sole randomized trial reported statistically significant survival benefits for HIPEC over surgery alone, while two comparative cohort studies did not. The pooled proportions for grade III-IV morbidity and postoperative death at 30 days were 34% (95% CI 20-52) and 0% (95% CI 0-5) respectively.

CONCLUSION

One randomized trial suggests that HIPEC at time of interval cytoreductive surgery should be considered in patients with primary EOC. However, there is significant heterogeneity in literature with respect to an appropriate HIPEC regimen, short- and long-term outcomes. High-quality prospective randomized trials are urgently needed to clarify the role of HIPEC in the first-line treatment of primary EOC.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: an update

In the treatment of advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC)-associated surgery and chemotherapy with intravenous platinum/taxane-based therapy most patients had early or late recurrence. Prevention of progression and recurrence is a major objective for the management of EOC. Recently, many clinical studies have evaluated the strategy with hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal (IP) drug delivery. This is an update of hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in EOC and a view for future strategies. Until recently studies on HIPEC in patients with EOC were mostly retrospective and heterogeneous. Thanks to recent clinical trials, it is reasonable to conclude that surgical cytoreduction and HIPEC is an interesting approach in the management of EOC without increasing morbidity.

Efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis

Objective: The role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is still controversial. Present analysis aims to evaluate the survival benefit of HIPEC in treatment of EOC patients. Methods: Articles related to 'HIPEC' and 'ovarian cancer' were comprehensively searched in four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library) up to 4 February 2018. Eligible studies were identified depending on the selection criteria. The survival outcome and adverse events were collected. The relationship between HIPEC and survival of EOC was assessed using random-effects models. Results: A total of 1464 patients from 17 trials were subjected to analysis. The pooled results showed that HIPEC significantly improved overall survival (OS, HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.36-0.69; p = 0.000) and progression-free survival (PFS, HR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.69; p = 0.000) among EOC patients when compared with no HIPEC controls. Similar results were observed in each year rate of survival. Subgroup analysis didn't lead to the opposite results, except no significant increased 1-year of OS in primary EOC and 1- and 2-year of PFS in recurrent EOC treated with HIPEC were observed. No significant difference existed in the adverse events and mortality between HIPEC and no HIPEC. Conclusions: HIPEC is associated with improved OS and PFS in both primary and recurrent EOC. However, no significant increased 1- and 2-year of PFS were reached in recurrent EOC treated with HIPEC. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Selection of patients with ovarian cancer who may show survival benefit from hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after cytoreductive surgery has been extensively studied in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from various malignancies. However, the effectiveness of HIPEC for ovarian cancer is still controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to identify patients with ovarian cancer who can obtain survival benefit from HIPEC.

METHODS

Articles regarding HIPEC in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched till December 2018. In total, 13 case-control studies and two randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. We investigated the effect of HIPEC on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), and performed subgroup analyses based on the study design, adjustment of confounding variables, and quality of the study.

RESULTS

HIPEC improved both DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.603; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.513-0.709) and OS (HR, 0.640; 95% CI, 0.519-0.789). In cases of primary disease, HIPEC improved DFS (HR, 0.580; 95% CI, 0.476-0.706) and OS (HR, 0.611; 95% CI, 0.376-0.992). Subgroup analyses revealed that HIPEC did not improve OS but improved DFS of patients with residual tumors ≤1 cm or no visible tumors. In cases of recurrent disease, HIPEC was associated with better OS (HR, 0.566; 95% CI, 0.379-0.844) but not with DFS. Subgroup analyses also revealed similar tendencies. However, HIPEC improved DFS of patients with residual tumors ≤1 cm or no visible tumors, while it improved OS of only those with residual tumors ≤1 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

HIPEC may improve DFS of patients with ovarian cancer when residual tumors were ≤1 cm or not visible. It may also improve OS of only patients with recurrent disease whose residual tumors were ≤1 cm.

A retrospective study comparing the efficacy of dose-dense chemotherapy, intraperitoneal chemotherapy and dose-dense chemotherapy with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced stage ovarian carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IP) and dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy have been employed with varying success in the treatment of advanced stage ovarian carcinoma. Despite the clinical benefits associated with these specific forms of chemotherapy administration, they have not been comparatively analyzed, vis-à-vis their efficacy.

STUDY DESIGN

Advanced stage ovarian cancer patients who were treated with platinum/taxane chemotherapy via a DD regimen (n = 100), IP approach (n = 81) or a DD regimen in conjunction with HIPEC (n = 64) were retrospectively evaluated. The clinical variables of interest were patient age, body mass index, surgery and pathology data, chemotherapy regimen, inclusion of maintenance therapy, and progression free/overall survival.

RESULTS

Progression free survival (PFS) was significantly more pronounced in the HIPEC (34.9 months) and IP (34.0 months) patients, compared to the DD group (27.6 months) (P = 0.005). A cox-proportional hazards regression model indicated that there was a decreased risk of disease progression accorded to the patients who were treated with IP chemo or HIPEC and DD chemotherapy (HR, 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.21-0.88; P = 0.022) and the subjects who underwent optimal cytoreductive surgery (HR, 2.42; 95 % CI: 1.22-4.80; P = 0.011). Positive BRCA status (HR, 0.434; 95 % CI: 1.59-3.44; P = 0.001) and number of chemotherapy regimens (HR, 1.36; 95 % CI: 1.159-1.61; P = 0.001) were significantly correlated with improved OS although we did not discern a survival benefit associated with any of the chemotherapy treatments (P = 0.136).

CONCLUSION

We observed PFS advantages conferred to the ovarian cancer patients treated with HIPEC and IP chemotherapy compared to DD chemotherapy. However, an overall survival advantage related to the chemotherapy regimens was not borne out, possibly due to the retrospective nature of the study or differing time periods wherein the specific patient cohorts underwent treatment.

Morbidity after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with carboplatin used for ovarian, tubal, and primary peritoneal cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Hypertherm intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is increasingly used in the treatment of ovarian, tubal, and primary peritoneal cancer (OC). The aim was to evaluate short-term morbidity of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and carboplatin HIPEC.

METHODS

Prospective feasibility study performed from January 2016 to December 2017. Twenty-five patients with primary OC (FIGO III-IV) received upfront or interval CRS combined with carboplatin HIPEC at dose 800 mg/m ² . Primary outcome measurements: grade 3 to 5 adverse events within 30 days according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Secondary outcome measurements: reoperation rate, length of hospital stay, readmission rate, and time from surgery to systemic chemotherapy administration.

RESULTS

No deaths (grade 5) or grade 4 adverse events were observed. Eleven patients (44.0%) experienced at least one grade 3 adverse event, the most common being an infection (28.0%) and neutropenia (12.0%). The reoperation rate was 8.0%. The median hospital stay was 14 days (range 9-25 days), and five patients (25.0%) were readmitted within 30 days after surgery. Median time from surgery to the administration of the first dose of systemic chemotherapy was 41 days (range 24-81 days).

CONCLUSION

Our small-scale prospective study supports that CRS and carboplatin HIPEC used for primary advanced-stage OC is feasible with acceptable morbidity.

[HIPEC in ovarian cancer: What should we expect?]

The results of PRODIGE 7 study demonstrate that the use of HIPEC is not beneficial for patients in the treatment of colorectal carcinomatosis. Nevertheless, a recent study published in NewEnglandJournalofMedicine showed that hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) increased overall survival for patients with ovarian peritoneal carcinomatosis. Although, the emergence of targeted therapies (anti-angiogenic agents, PARP-inhibitors, anti-PDL1) results in new standards of treatment in first line or recurrence disease. In this general context, what is the potential interest of HIPEC for the treatment of ovarian carcinoma?

The prognosis impact of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) plus cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in advanced ovarian cancer: the meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Previous studies about the prognostic value of the HIPEC have yielded controversial results. Therefore, this study aims to assess the impact of HIPEC on patients with ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

We included 13 comparative studies, and found that the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in HIPEC groups were superior to groups without HIPEC treatment in the all total population (HR = 0.54,95% CI:0.45 to 0.66, HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.62). Additionally, the subgroup analysis showed that patients with advanced primary ovarian cancers also gained improved OS and PFS benefit from HIPEC (HR = 0.59,95% CI:0.46 to 0.75, HR = 0.41,95% CI:0.32 to 0.54). With regard to recurrent ovarian cancer, HIPEC was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.45,95% CI:0.24 to 0.83), but for the PFS, no correlation was observed between HIPC group and the non-HIPEC group (HR = 0.55,95% CI:0.27 to 1.11). HIPEC also led to favorable clinical outcome (HR = 0.64,95% CI:0.50 to 0.82, HR = 0.36,95% CI:0.20 to 0.65) for stage III or IV ovarian cancer with initial diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The review indicated that HIPEC-based regimens was correlated with better clinical prognosis for patients with primary ovarian cancers. For recurrent ovarian cancers, HIPEC only improved the OS but did not elicit significant value on the PFS.

The prognosis impact of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) plus cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in advanced ovarian cancer: the meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Previous studies about the prognostic value of the HIPEC have yielded controversial results. Therefore, this study aims to assess the impact of HIPEC on patients with ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

We included 13 comparative studies, and found that the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in HIPEC groups were superior to groups without HIPEC treatment in the all total population (HR = 0.54,95% CI:0.45 to 0.66, HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.62). Additionally, the subgroup analysis showed that patients with advanced primary ovarian cancers also gained improved OS and PFS benefit from HIPEC (HR = 0.59,95% CI:0.46 to 0.75, HR = 0.41,95% CI:0.32 to 0.54). With regard to recurrent ovarian cancer, HIPEC was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.45,95% CI:0.24 to 0.83), but for the PFS, no correlation was observed between HIPC group and the non-HIPEC group (HR = 0.55,95% CI:0.27 to 1.11). HIPEC also led to favorable clinical outcome (HR = 0.64,95% CI:0.50 to 0.82, HR = 0.36,95% CI:0.20 to 0.65) for stage III or IV ovarian cancer with initial diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The review indicated that HIPEC-based regimens was correlated with better clinical prognosis for patients with primary ovarian cancers. For recurrent ovarian cancers, HIPEC only improved the OS but did not elicit significant value on the PFS.

Effects of CytoReductive surgery plus hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) versus CytoReductive surgery for ovarian cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effects of Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) and CytoReductive Surgery (CRS) for ovarian cancer patients remain controversial.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases to investigate Overall Survival (OS), Disease Free Survival (DFS) and adverse effects between HIPEC and CRS group.

RESULTS

In our overall analysis (13 studies), patients in the HIPEC group exhibited a significantly improved OS (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.41-0.76, P < 0.01) and DFS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.48-0.77, P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis revealed improved OS (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.40-0.83, P = 0.04) and DFS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.47-0.80, P < 0.01) for primary ovarian cancer in favour of HIPEC group. However, recurrent ovarian cancer patients who received HIPEC exhibited only significantly improved OS (HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.24-0.96, P < 0.01) but not DFS (HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.33-1.08, P = 0.09). In addition, both significantly improved OS and DFS were also observed in patients who received HIPEC in the subgroups based on the following factors: studies published before 2015, studies with ≥100 total patients, a single drug used for HIPEC, 90-min HIPEC duration and a regimen of CRS plus HIPEC followed by chemotherapy. Moreover systematically reviewed toxicity, morbidity, mortality and long-term outcomes were tolerable after HIPEC.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of HIPEC to CRS could significantly improve OS of ovarian cancer patients, albeit optimal drug regimen is not clear.