Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in serosa-invasive gastric cancer patients

Novel inflammatory-nutritional prognostic index for advanced gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy and prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is one of the methods to prevent peritoneal metastasis of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, the prognosis of gastric cancer patients who receive this treatment are different.

AIM

To investigate whether inflammation and nutritional indicators affect the prognosis of AGC patients undergoing gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC, and to develop a novel inflammatory nutritional prognostic index (INPI). Additionally, we aimed to construct a nomogram model to visually predict the prognosis of these patients and provide more accurate guidance for clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Clinical data from 181 Locally AGC patients who underwent gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC treatment at The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University were retrospectively collected. Multicollinearity analysis and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression were utilized to construct the INPI. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Both univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze independent prognostic factors, and a prognostic nomogram was generated. And the model was validated using the bootstrap method.

RESULTS

Clinical data from 181 locally AGC patients who underwent gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC treatment at The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University were retrospectively collected. Multicollinearity analysis and LASSO Cox regression were utilized to construct the INPI. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Both univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were applied to analyze independent prognostic factors, and a prognostic nomogram was generated. And the model was validated using the bootstrap method.

CONCLUSION

Inflammation and nutrition indicators are associated with the prognosis of AGC patients undergoing gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC. The nomogram based on the INPI and clinical features supports personalized treatment strategies improving prognosis for AGC patients undergoing gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases at an Australian centre

INTRODUCTION

Gastric cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality, with poorer prognosis in the presence of peritoneal metastases as low as 2.8-9 months. Systemic therapy has a limited role. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been shown to improve survival. This study evaluates survival of patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases (GCPM) undergoing CRS and HIPEC at an Australian centre.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for GCPM from January 2009 to December 2023. Data included demographics, perioperative factors, histopathology and survival.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were identified, with median postoperative overall survival of 11.7 months (95% CI 8.6-34.2 months). Most patients had poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (n = 23, 96%), with 14 (58%) exhibiting signet cell pathology. 62% (n = 15) received preoperative chemotherapy. Median PCI was 5, with a CC score of 0 in 96% of patients (n = 23). Clavien-Dindo III/IV morbidity was noted in 8 patients (33%) with no perioperative mortality. No survival differences were found between those with signet cell pathology and those without (10.6 vs. 11.7 months, p = 0.83), nor between those receiving preoperative chemotherapy and those who did not (11.7 vs. 10.6 months, p = 0.60). Age, sex, PCI, CC and tumour markers demonstrated correlations with survival in linear regression, but no individual factor significantly influenced outcomes.

CONCLUSION

CRS and HIPEC for low volume GCPM should be considered in select patients.

Exploring the Efficacy of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Perfusion Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer: Meta-analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Based on randomized clinical trials, this meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of intent-to-cure or prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase databases were all systemically searched from 2004 to 2023. The quality of the study was assessed by using the Cochrane risk of bias method. The certainty of the evidence was determined by using the GRADE evaluation.

RESULTS

In this study, 12 articles with a total of 1181 patients were analyzed based on the inclusion criteria. The findings revealed that HIPEC had a higher survival rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.43, 0.86], P = 0.005, RR 0.82; 95% CI [0.70, 0.97], P = 0.02, RR 0.83; 95% CI [0.71, 0.96], P < 0.01, and RR 0.63 [0.54, 0.73], P < 0.00001) after 1, 2, 3, and 5 years compared with the control group. The RR was statistically significant for 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. Furthermore, the observed overall recurrence rate for the HIPEC group was lower than control group and statistically significant (RR 0.59; 95% CI [0.50, 0.68], P < 0.0001). Higher disease-free survival rate (RR 1.42; 95% CI [1.07, 1.89], P < 0.01) was observed in the HIPEC group and statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastric cancer patients treated with HIPEC have shown promising outcomes with regard to survival, recurrence, disease-free survival, and adverse reactions. However, multicenter trials with larger sample sizes consisting of different ethnicities is suggested.

Prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin using hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal carcinomatosis significantly worsens the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer. Cytoreduction + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in advanced gastric cancer (AGC); however, its application remains controversial owing to the variability of the approaches used to perform it and the lack of high-quality evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the role of surgery and HIPEC in the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing surgery + HIPEC vs surgery + chemotherapy for the prophylaxis of peritoneal carcinomatosis and cytoreduction + HIPEC vs chemotherapy or other palliative options for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies enrolling 1641 patients were included. Surgery + HIPEC significantly improved overall survival in both prophylactic (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56) and therapeutic (HR, 0.57) settings. When surgery + HIPEC was performed with prophylactic intent, the pooled 3-year mortality rate was 32%, whereas for the control group it was 55%. The overall and peritoneal recurrence rates were also reduced (risk ratio [RR], 0.59 and 0.40, respectively). No significant difference was found in morbidity between groups (RR, 0.92).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current knowledge, HIPEC in AGC seems to be a safe and effective tool for prophylaxis and a promising resource for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Regarding the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis, the scarcity of large-cohort studies and the heterogeneity of the techniques adopted prevented us from achieving a definitive recommendation.

Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer with intraoperative detection of limited peritoneal metastasis: a Phase II study of CLASS-05 trial

Background

Systemic chemotherapy for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis has limited clinical benefit; for those with intraoperative detection of occult peritoneal metastasis, cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an alternative treatment. However, the feasibility and effects of this modality and criteria for selecting suitable groups remain unclear. This study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery (L-CRS) followed by HIPEC in gastric cancer with limited peritoneal metastasis, and this study also aimed to determine the optimized cut-off of the peritoneal cancer index.

Methods

Between March 2017 and November 2019, patients diagnosed with gastric cancer peritoneal metastases by using laparoscopy and the Sugarbaker peritoneal cancer index of ≤12 were eligible for inclusion. All patients received L-CRS (including gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection) and resection of visible peritoneal metastasis, followed by post-operative HIPEC, and systemic chemotherapy. The primary end points were median progression-free survival and median survival time, and the secondary outcomes were morbidity and mortality within 30 days after surgery.

Results

Thirty patients were eligible for analysis, of whom 19 (63.3%) were female, and the overall mean age was 53.0 years. The post-operative morbidity was 20% and the severe complication rate was 10%. The median survival time was 27.0 months with a 2-year overall survival rate of 52.3% and median progression-free survival was 14.0 months with a 2-year progression-free survival of 30.4%.

Conclusions

L-CRS followed by HIPEC can be safely performed for gastric cancer with limited peritoneal metastasis and potential survival benefits.

Prognostic Analysis of Prophylactic Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy of prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

METHODS

We included 198 patients treated from December 2016 to January 2019; of these patients, the 132 who had clinical T4 gastric cancer were divided into a hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy group (HIPEC group) and a radical gastrectomy and D2 lymph node dissection group (control group). Because this study was retrospective, we used propensity score matching (PSM) to reduce selectivity bias; we then assessed risk factors for recurrence and compared prognosis in terms of survival in the gastrectomy and prophylactic HIPEC groups.

RESULTS

Prophylactic HIPEC reduced the risk of postoperative peritoneal metastasis (PM: 27.5% vs. 10.5%, P = 0.015) and did not increase the risk of postoperative complications, but there was no significant difference in the effect on hepatic metastases or other distant metastases. Risk factors for recurrence included pT4 staging and positive lymph node metastases. Both disease-free survival (DFS: HR 0.592; 95% CI 0.354-0.990; P = 0.042) and peritoneal recurrence-free survival (PFS: HR 0.314; 95% CI 0.127-0.774; P = 0.008) were better in the prophylactic HIPEC group than in the gastrectomy-only group. In addition, there was no difference in the prognosis of patients between the two groups of raltitrexed (RT) and paclitaxel (PTX) for perfusion dosing.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that prophylactic HIPEC could prevent postoperative PM in patients with AGC and did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications. However, it was not found to be effective in the prevention of other metastases, such as hepatic metastases.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for primary gastric cancer

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the benefits and harms of intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) in people with primary gastric cancer, with or without peritoneal metastasis.

Effect of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy on survival and recurrence rates in advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Around 5-20% of patients who undergo surgery for advanced gastric cancer (AGC), which invades into the muscularis propria or beyond, have peritoneal carcinomatosis. The peritoneal recurrence rate is 10-54%, which is associated with a poor prognosis. The role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in AGC with and without peritoneal carcinomatosis is not clearly defined.

METHODS

The authors conducted a meta-analysis, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, of the clinical trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies evaluating the role of HIPEC in AGC over the last 10 years. The studies were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases between January 2011 to December 2021. Clinical data including overall survival, recurrence free survival, overall recurrence rate, peritoneal recurrence rate, and complications analyzed using RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials and 10 nonrandomized studies, comprising a total of 1700 patients were included. HIPEC was associated with significantly improved OS at 3 [odd ratio (OR) 1.89, 95% CI: 1.17-3.05] and 5 years (OR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.29-2.71). HIPEC was associated with reduced overall recurrence (OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.31-0.80) and peritoneal recurrence (OR 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11-0.47). HIPEC was not associated with increased complications. The occurrence of postoperative renal dysfunction was significantly higher in the HIPEC group (OR 3.94, 95% CI: 1.85-8.38).

CONCLUSION

The role of HIPEC in AGC has evolved over the past decade. HIPEC may improve survival rates and reduce recurrence rates in patients with AGC, without significant increase in complications and with a favorable impact on 3 and 5-year survival.

HIPEC with CRS versus cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for the gastric cancer metastasis to peritoneum

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastases (PM) have a poor prognosis in gastric cancer (GC). Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) gives favorable outcomes, but the influence of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains contentious. We designed to distinguish results between CRS versus HIPEC-CRS in patients with peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane library accessed to collect data and language is restricted to English. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform statistical analysis. The outcomes for categorical variables are mentioned in the risk ratio.

RESULTS

Ten trials involving 1367 patients in which 707 were CRS-HIPEC, while 660 CRS. We got significant results in 3rd year survival (P < 0.05), while 1st and 5th years are not statistically significant P > 0.05.

CONCLUSION

To compare with CRS, CRS-HIPEC has improved survival rate in deprived of further morbidity or mortality.

Survival and complications of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with intra-abdominal malignancies: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: Peritoneal metastasis (PM) is an advanced stage of intra-abdominal malignancy with a very poor prognosis. In recent years, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) combined with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has been utilized as an active treatment in the prevention and treatment of PM, with encouraging results. However, compared with CRS alone, the results of the CRS plus HIPEC strategy in the treatment of patients with intra-abdominal malignancies are still controversial. This study sought to determine the impact of HIPEC + CRS on patient survival and adverse events (AEs) by reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for all types of intra-abdominal malignancies.

Methods: A PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Clinical Trials.gov search extracted all RCTs until 12 October 2022, examining the CRS + HIPEC vs. CRS alone strategies in the treatment of various types of intra-abdominal malignancies. The outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and AEs. The dichotomous data were pooled and reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The survival outcome data were pooled using hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% CIs. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.

Results: A total of 12 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, including 873 patients in the CRS + HIPEC group and 878 patients in the CRS alone group. The studies included 3 (617 patients) on colorectal cancer, 4 (416 patients) on gastric cancer, and 5 (718 patients) on ovarian cancer. Our analysis showed no difference in OS between the CRS + HIPEC and CRS alone groups (HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.62–1.01). Subgroup analysis showed that CRS + HIPEC improved the OS of gastric cancer patients (HR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.32–0.76) compared with CRS alone. However, CRS + HIPEC did not significantly improve the OS of colorectal cancer (HR: 1.06, 95% CI 0.81–1.38) and ovarian cancer (HR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.62–1.07) patients. In addition, there was no significant difference in DFS/RFS (HR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.57–1.07) or PFS (HR: 1.03, 95% CI 0.77–1.38) between the two groups. Compared with CRS alone, CRS with HIPEC had greater nephrotoxicity (OR: 0.45, 95% CI 0.21–0.98), while other AEs did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that CRS + HIPEC may improve OS in gastric cancer patients compared with CRS alone, but we did not observe a benefit for DFS/RFS. For patients with ovarian and colorectal cancers, our results suggest that HIPEC + CRS does not appear to improve survival outcomes. In addition, CRS + HIPEC has higher nephrotoxicity than CRS alone. More evidence from RCTs is needed to evaluate whether the use of CRS + HIPEC is an appropriate option.

Application of intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in China. Intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy is a comprehensive therapy that combines intraperitoneal perfusion, hyperthermia, and chemotherapy. It has a good curative effect in peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. In recent years, with the continuous progress of technology and the deepening of research, the scope of application of intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy is more extensive. In this paper, we discuss intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy with regard to its application in gastric cancer, commonly used drugs, safety, and prospects.

Combined Prophylactic Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Intraoperative Radiotherapy for Localized Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Cancer: A Comparative Nonrandomized Study

BACKGROUND

The peritoneum frequently is the only recurrence site after radical resection of gastric cancer. Data suggest that hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) reduce peritoneal recurrence and possibly improve survival for patients with resected gastric and serosal involvement. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of combining prophylactic HIPEC and IORT after radical resection of localized gastric cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the medical records of adult patients with histologically proven gastric/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent radical resection with curative intent were evaluated for recurrence and survival according to whether they received prophylactic HIPEC and IORT.

RESULTS

The eligibility criteria were met by 58 patients, 33 of whom underwent prophylactic HIPEC and IORT after radical surgery. Overall, 91% the HIPEC/IORT group and 72% of the surgery-only group had ≤pT3 disease. The median follow-up period was 26.6 months for the HIPEC/IORT group and 50.6 months for the surgery group. Locoregional recurrence occurred for six patients (18.1%) in the HIPEC/IORT group and five patients (20%) in the surgery-only group, with peritoneal metastasis (PM) occurring in respectively three (9%) and six (24%) patients. The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) duration was 23.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.5-39.9 months) for the HIPEC/IORT group versus 24.8 months (95% CI 0.0-51.1 months) for the surgery-only group (p = 0.88), and the corresponding 5-year overall survival (OS) estimates were 69% and 58%.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic HIPEC and IORT after radical surgery for localized gastric or gastroesophageal cancer did not improve RFS or OS for an unselected group of patients at risk for peritoneal recurrence.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery for gastric carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short and long-term outcomes (GOETH STUDY)-a collaborative randomized controlled trial by ACOI, FONDAZIONE AIOM, SIC, SICE, and SICO

INTRODUCTION

At the time of diagnosis, 15-20% of gastric carcinomas are in stage T4 or T4b. Furthermore, 5-20% of patients undergoing potentially curative surgery suffer from synchronous or metachronous peritoneal metastases. To date, neither surgery nor systemic chemotherapy successfully controls peritoneal dissemination, offering a limited impact on survival. Peritoneal metastases are in fact responsible for death in around 60% of gastric cancer patients. Several Eastern studies in the past have focused on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a prophylactic measure in patients with serosal extension, nodal involvement, and positive peritoneal fluid cytology. Therefore, a new multimodal therapeutic strategy based on aggressive surgery plus new locoregional treatment may prolong survival in this particular clinical scenario.

METHODS

This study compares the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical gastric resection, appendectomy, resection of the round ligament of the liver, and bilateral adnexectomy) plus hybrid CO2 HIPEC system versus standard surgery in patients with T3-T4 N0-N + gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients will be randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to the experimental arm or standard surgery. The primary endpoint is to establish the difference in disease-free survival between the groups. The secondary objective is to compare the safety and tolerability of prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO₂ versus standard surgery.

DISCUSSION

Considering the poor prognosis of patients with peritoneal dissemination from gastric cancer, a prophylactic strategy to prevent peritoneal metastases may be beneficial. In patients with gastric cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis, we propose aggressive surgical treatment with radical gastrectomy, removal of organs at risk of harbouring tumour cells, and HIPEC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03917173. Registered on 16 April 2019.

PROTOCOL VERSION

v1, March 27, 2019. Protocol number: IRFMN-GCC-7813. EudraCT number: 2019-001478-27.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer based on laboratory tests is safe: a single Chinese center analysis

PURPOSE

About 15%-40% of gastric cancer patients have peritoneal metastasis, which leads to poor prognosis. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is considered to be an effective treatment for these patients. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of HIPEC in patients with gastric cancer diagnosed from laboratory tests.

METHODS

The clinical and pathological data of 63 patients with gastric cancer who underwent HIPEC in 2017-2021 were prospectively recorded. Fifty-five patients underwent cytoreductive surgery + HIPEC, and eight patients received HIPEC alone. The factors associated with HIPEC safety and efficacy were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

RESULTS

The average patient age was 54.84 years and 68.3% of patients were male. Moreover, 79.4% of patients had a peritoneal carcinoma index (PCI) score of ≤ 7 and 61.9% had a completeness of cytoreduction score of 0. Because of peritoneal metastasis, 29 patients (46.03%) were classified as stage IV. Laboratory tests showed no differences in pre-HIPEC blood test results compared to post-HIPEC results after removing the effects of surgery. HIPEC treatment did not cause obvious liver or kidney damage. Serum calcium levels decreased significantly after HIPEC (P = 0.0018). The Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score correlated with the patient's physical function and improved after HIPEC (P = 0.0045). In coagulation tests, FDP (P < 0.0001) and D-dimer (P < 0.0001) levels increased significantly and CA242 (P = 0.0159), CA724 (P < 0.0001), and CEA (P < 0.0014) levels decreased significantly after HIPEC. Completeness of cytoreduction score was an independent prognostic factor. HIPEC did not show a survival benefit in patients with gastric cancer (P = 0.5505).

CONCLUSION

HIPEC is a safe treatment for patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis based on the laboratory tests. However, the efficacy of this treatment on gastric-derived peritoneal metastases requires further confirmation.

Role of prophylactic HIPEC in non-metastatic, serosa-invasive gastric cancer: a literature review

The role of prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (p-HIPEC) in serosa invasive gastric cancers without gross or microscopic peritoneal disease, to reduce the rate of peritoneal relapse is an area of ongoing research. Although p-HIPEC is effective in reducing the rate of peritoneal relapse and improving disease free and overall survival with or without adjuvant chemotherapy, when added to curative surgery in locally advanced, non-metastatic gastric cancers, the available literature is at best, heterogeneous, centre-specific and skewed. Apart from that, variations in the systemic therapy used, and the presence of the associated nodal disease further complicate this picture. To evaluate the role of p-HIPEC the PubMed, Cochrane central register of clinical trials, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meeting library were searched with the search terms, "gastric", "cancer", "hyperthermic", "intraperitoneal", "chemotherapy", prophylactic", "HIPEC" in various combinations, and a critical review of the available evidence was done. Although p-HIPEC is a promising therapy in the management of locally advanced gastric cancers, the current evidence is insufficient to recommend its inclusion into routine clinical practice. Future research should be directed towards identification of the appropriate patient subset and towards redefining its role with current peri-operative systemic therapies.

Comparative Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Radical Surgery With or Without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and safety of preventive hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for gastric cancer (GC) remain controversial. This study aimed to describe the safety and efficacy of radical surgery (RS) with or without HIPEC for patients with locally advanced GC (LAGC).

METHODS

The study identified 394 patients with LAGC who underwent RS with or without HIPEC in China.

RESULTS

Of the 394 patients, 146 received RS+HIPEC, and 248 received RS alone. The RS-HIPEC procedure improved the relapse-free survival (RFS) of the GC patients (2-year RFS, 62.9 % vs 37.8 %; χ² = 4.468; P = 0.035) compared with those who received RS alone. The incidence of postoperative myelosuppression (Z = 4.077; P = 0.043) was higher in the RS+HIPEC group, whereas the incidence of wound complications was lower (Z = 4.077; P = 0.043). In the subgroup analysis, HIPEC improved the OS (2-year OS, 69.9 % vs 40.8 %; χ² = 5.537; P =0.019) and RFS (2-year RFS, 65.6 % vs 33.3 %; χ² = 7.380, P = 0.007) of the patients with nerve invasion and the RFS of the patients with vascular invasion (2-year RFS, 60.7 % vs 31.6 %; χ² = 3.891; P = 0.049). In addition, the prognosis of the patients who underwent HIPEC was better when the tumor diameter was smaller than 5 cm (2-year RFS, 68.6 % vs 37.9 %; χ² = 3.957; P = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

The RS + HIPEC procedure improved the RFS of the patients with LAGC compared with RS alone, especially the patients with nerve or vascular invasion and the patients with tumor smaller than 5 cm. Moreover, it reduced the incidence of wound complications and did not induce more perioperative complications in addition to myelosuppression.

Update of randomized controlled trials evaluating cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in prevention and therapy of peritoneal metastasis: a systematic review

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with favorable short- and long-term oncological outcomes in highly selected patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). The aim of our review was to review published, recruiting or ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating CRS and HIPEC vs. other strategies (systemic chemotherapy or CRS alone) and to update the studies recently described in 2016.

Content

Systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. Searches for published and ongoing trials were based, respectively, on PubMed and international clinical databases since 2016.

Summary

46 trials randomized 9,063 patients: 13 in colorectal cancer (3 in therapeutic strategy and 10 in prophylactic strategy), 16 in gastric cancer (4 in therapeutic strategy and 12 in prophylactic strategy) and 17 in ovarian cancer (12 in front-line therapy and 5 in recurrence settings).

Outlook

In contrast to many recruiting studies, few published studies analyzed the potential advantage of CRS and HIPEC in therapeutic and prophylactic treatment of PM. The potential effect of this combined treatment has been proven in ovarian cancer in interval surgery, but remains still debated in other situations. Promising trials are currently recruiting to provide further evidence of the effectiveness of CRS and HIPEC.

Current role for cytoreduction and HIPEC for gastric cancer with peritoneal disease

Gastric cancer (GC) is an aggressive malignancy with a high burden of peritoneal disease. Evidence regarding the use of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to improve outcomes has been growing. However, given multiple limitations, there remains a lack of international consensus regarding the optimal treatment paradigm. This review article discusses the burden of peritoneal disease in GC patients and the role of CRS + HIPEC in all treatment intents—curative, prophylactic, and palliative.

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) Combined with Surgery: A 12-Year Meta-Analysis of this Promising Treatment Strategy for Advanced Gastric Cancer at Different Stages

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was designed to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) combined with surgery for different stages of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) during the last 12 years.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched online, and papers were retrieved from other sources. Next, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality nonrandomized controlled trials (NRCTs) were selected for this analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan5.4 software.

RESULT

The 10 RCTs and 13 NRCTs selected for the study included 1892 patients. The overall survival rates were higher in the HIPEC group at 1 year (risk ratio [RR], 0.52; P = 0.004) and 3 years (RR, 0.63; P < 0.00001) than in the control group for the patients without peritoneal cancer, and the HIPEC group had a significant reduction in the recurrence rate (RR, 0.60; p < 0.00001). Among the patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), the HIPEC group had significantly higher overall survival rates at 1 year (RR, 0.62; P = 0.00001), 2 years (RR, 0.85; P = 0.002), and 3 years (RR, 0.87; P = 0.0001), with an increase in the overall median survival time of 4.67 months. The two groups showed no statistically significant difference in terms of complications for patients with PC (RR, 1.03; P = 0.93) or without PC (RR, 1.15; P = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

For local AGC without PC, standard surgery combined with prophylactic HIPEC could prolong survival and reduce the recurrence rate without more complications. The prognosis of this treatment strategy for patients with PC is closely related to patient selection. Complete cytoreduction combined with therapeutic HIPEC could prolong survival.

Prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy may benefit the long-term survival of patients after radical gastric cancer surgery

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been proven to improve the survival rate of gastric cancer and reduce peritoneal recurrence. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic HIPEC after radical gastric cancer surgery in this study. Researchers searched for studies published in PubMed, Embase, Web of science, Scopus, Cochrane, Clinical key databases and Microsoft Academic databases to identify studies that examine the impact of prophylactic HIPEC on the survival, recurrence and adverse events of patients undergoing radical gastric cancer surgery. RevMan 5.3 was used to analyze the results and risk of bias. The PROSERO registration number is CRD42021262016. This meta-analysis included 22 studies with a total of 2097 patients, 12 of which are RCTs. The results showed that the 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rate was significantly favorable to HIPEC (OR 5.10, 2.07, 1.96 respectively). Compared with the control group, the overall recurrence rate and peritoneal recurrence rate of the HIPEC group were significantly lower (OR 0.41, 0.24 respectively). Significantly favorable to the control group in terms of renal dysfunction and pulmonary dysfunction complications (OR 2.44, 6.03 respectively). Regarding the causes of death due to postoperative recurrence: liver recurrence, lymph node and local recurrence and peritoneal recurrence, the overall effect is not significantly different (OR 0.81, 1.19, 0.37 respectively). 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival follow-up may be incremented by the prophylactic HIPEC, and which reduce the overall recurrence rate and peritoneal recurrence rate. HIPEC may have high-risk of pulmonary dysfunction and renal dysfunction complications. No difference has been found in the deaths due to recurrence after surgery.

Resveratrol and Its Analogs: Potent Agents to Reverse Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition in Tumors

Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), a complicated program through which polarized epithelial cells acquire motile mesothelial traits, is regulated by tumor microenvironment. EMT is involved in tumor progression, invasion and metastasis via reconstructing the cytoskeleton and degrading the tumor basement membrane. Accumulating evidence shows that resveratrol, as a non-flavonoid polyphenol, can reverse EMT and inhibit invasion and migration of human tumors via diverse mechanisms and signaling pathways. In the present review, we will summarize the detailed mechanisms and pathways by which resveratrol and its analogs (e.g. Triacetyl resveratrol, 3,5,4'-Trimethoxystilbene) might regulate the EMT process in cancer cells to better understand their potential as novel anti-tumor agents. Resveratrol can also reverse chemoresistance via EMT inhibition and improvement of the antiproliferative effects of conventional treatments. Therefore, resveratrol and its analogs have the potential to become novel adjunctive agents to inhibit cancer metastasis, which might be partly related to their blocking of the EMT process.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in prevention of gastric cancer metachronous peritoneal metastases: a systematic review

Gastric cancer progression resulting in metachronous peritoneal metastasizing is almost always associated with an adverse prognosis. This review discusses various options of preventing metachronous peritoneal metastases in radically operated gastric cancer patients. Also examined are different hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) regimens employed in gastric cancer treatment, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and long-term treatment outcomes. The authors also review their own experience of using HIPEC based on the combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin in doses of 50 mg/m² at 42 °C for 1 h to prevent gastric cancer peritoneal dissemination. As a result, progression-free survival rose from 19.6%±5.6% to 47.1%±6.3% (P_log-rank <0.001) and dissemination-free survival-from 22.7%±6.0% to 51.9%±6.3% (P_log-rank <0.001). It is noted that the combination of the described HIPEC regimen with systemic chemotherapy helped raise metastases-free 3-year survival rate to up to 91.0%±9.0% (P_log-rank =0.025) compared with 48.6%±6.4% for patients who underwent only a combined surgery/HIPEC treatment. HIPEC is a promising combined treatment strategy for radically operated gastric cancer patients that can improve patient survival and decrease peritoneal dissemination rate. However, the number of randomized studies on adjuvant HIPEC are still insufficient for a subgroup assessment of efficacy of the given chemotherapy regimens and generation of evidence-based recommendations on the individual use of chemotherapy agents and their combinations, and HIPEC procedural techniques. Further prospective randomized studies are needed to assess the practicability of complementing HIPEC with adjuvant systemic chemotherapies.

Intra-operative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer: a narrative review

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC) has long been regarded as the terminal disease, lacking of effective treatments. In recent 40 years, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), and early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), has been recommended as a preferred treatment option for some selected patients with GCPM. Intraperitoneal free cancer cells were recognized as the pathological cause of PM and the primary target for intraperitoneal chemotherapy. There were a lot of evidence demonstrating that HIPEC could effectively eradiate intraperitoneal free cancer cells and prolong overall survival in GCPM. However, there are still no standard HIPEC protocols. This review summarized the current HIPEC regimens used in GCPM from a literature search, trying to conclude the optimal HIPEC in GCPM, and indicate the future direction of HIPEC study. Moreover, the new data on the exploration of HIPEC in GCPM at Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University was shared. In conclusion, there was not enough evidence from publications and our own experience to conclude a recommended HIPEC regimen for GCPM. There is urgent need for standardizing HIPEC protocols worldwide. Accordingly, more international collaborations focusing on pharmacology and HIPEC-related parameters to generate high level evidence are essential.

Determinants of Survival for Patients with Neoadjuvant-Treated Node-Negative Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study sought to determine prognostic markers for disease recurrence and survival in a cohort of neoadjuvant-treated, node-negative gastric cancer patients (ypT0-4N0M0).

METHODS

Clinicopathologic data from patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent gastrectomy at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from 1995 to 2017 were evaluated. Patients with AJCC TNM stage ypT0-4N0M0 were considered for analysis.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 212 patients with a mean age of 58.3 years. Of these patients, 60 % were male, 53 % were Caucasian, 87 % received chemoradiation, and 13 % received chemotherapy. The findings showed a median overall survival (OS) rate of 11.3 years, a 5-year survival rate of 72 %, and a 10-year survival rate of 57 %. During a median follow-up period of 5.5 years, 38.2 % of the patients died. In the multivariable analysis, ypT4-stage and nodal yield fewer than 16 were significantly associated with reduced OS. Cancer classified as ypT4 had more aggressive biologic traits, including lymphovascular and perineural invasion, and was treated more aggressively with total gastrectomy and additional organ resection despite frequent positive margins. Depth of invasion remained significantly associated with worse outcome after the analysis controlled for nodal yield and possible stage migration. Compared with ypT0-3 tumors, ypT4 cancers were associated with significantly more recurrences (13 % vs. 45 %; p < 0.05), and the primary modes of failure for ypT4 lesions were local recurrence and peritoneal metastases (88 % of recurrences).

CONCLUSIONS

Depth of primary tumor invasion and nodal yield were significantly associated with OS among the patients with ypT0-4N0M0 gastric cancer. Serosal invasion (ypT4) was associated with a high rate of peritoneal recurrence, and trials of intraperitoneal therapy targeting these patients should be considered.

Phase II trial of prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer after curative surgery

Background

HIPEC is an emerging procedure to treat peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. Data about HIPEC in locally advanced gastric cancer is scarce. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the safety and toxicity of prophylactic HIPEC with cisplatin for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Methods

From March 2015 to November 2016, a prospective, randomized phase II trial was conducted. After radical gastrectomy, patients in the experimental group underwent HIPEC with cisplatin followed by adjuvant chemotherapy with SOX regime. Patients in the other group were treated with SOX regime alone. Postoperative complications and patient survival were compared.

Results

In total, 50 patients were eligible for analyses. No significant difference was found in the incidence of postoperative complications including anastomotic/intestinal leakage, liver dysfunction, bone marrow suppression, wound infection and ileus (P > 0.05). Mean duration of hospitalization after radical gastrectomy was 11.7 days. 12.2 days in experimental group and 10.8 days in control group respectively (P = 0.255). The percentage of patients with elevated tumor markers was 12.1% in experimental group, which was significantly lower than 41.2% in control group (P = 0.02). 3-year RFS of patients who treated with or without prophylactic HIPEC were 84.8 and 88.2% respectively (P = 0.986). In the multivariate analysis, pathological T stage was the only independent risk factor for the RFS of patients (P = 0.012, HR =15.071).

Conclusion

Additional intraoperative HIPEC with cisplatin did not increase postoperative complications for locally advanced gastric cancer after curative surgery. Prophylactic HIPEC with cisplatin was safe and tolerable, while it did not reduce the risk of peritoneal recurrence in this trial, supporting further studies to validate the efficacy of it.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000038331. Registered 18 September 2020 - Retrospectively registered, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=59692.

Surgical and oncologic outcomes of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for uterine leiomyosarcoma: A systematic review of literature

OBJECTIVE

To examine the perioperative and survival outcomes in women with disseminated peritoneal uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) who underwent cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review of literature was conducted using multiple public search engines, PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, in compliance with the PRISMA guidelines. Women with disseminated peritoneal uLMS treated with CRS-HIPEC were analyzed. Perioperative morbidity and mortality rate as well as oncologic outcomes related to CRS-HIPEC were assessed.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria from 2004 to 2020, including 8 case series (n=28) and 2 original articles (n=47). Of the 75 patients, 68 (90.7%) were women with uLMS whereas 7 women were non-uLMS. Of these, 64 (85.3%) had recurrent disease, and 39 (52.0%) received chemotherapy or radiotherapy prior to CRS-HIPEC. The perioperative mortality rate was 4.0% (intraoperative 1.3%, and postoperative 2.7%), and postoperative complications (grade ≥3) rate ranged 21.4-22.2%. With regard to HIPEC regimens (n=75), cisplatin was most frequently used (n=55, 73.3%) followed by melphalan (n=17, 22.7%) and others (n=3, 4.0%). Among the two observational studies, the median overall survival after CRS-HIPEC treatment was 29.5-37 months. In one limited comparative effectiveness study (n=13), albeit statistically non-significant CRS-HIPEC was associated with higher progression-free survival versus CRS alone (3-year rates, 71.4% versus 0%, P=0.10). When the HIPEC regimens were compared, melphalan use was associated with decreased uLMS-related mortality compared to a cisplatin-based regimen, but the association was not statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.04-3.05, P=0.35).

CONCLUSION

Effectiveness of CRS-HIPEC for disseminated peritoneal uLMS is yet to be determined. As interpretation of the available data on survival is limited due to small sample sizes or the lack of an active comparator, further study is warranted to examine the safety and survival effect of CRS-HIPEC in disseminated peritoneal uLMS.

Prophylactic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the prevention and control of peritoneal metastasis in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Peritoneal metastasis is associated with poor prognosis, with studies in the literature reporting the survival of peritoneal metastasis without treatment to be three to six months. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown positive outcomes by improving the prognosis in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials was done to determine the prophylactic role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in preventing and controlling peritoneal metastasis gastrointestinal origin. Randomized controlled trials published between January 2019 to June 2021 were included. The databases used were MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), and the Cochrane library. Cochrane handbook for systematic review of intervention was used to assess the risk of bias in included trials. The results were reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of five trials met the inclusion criteria. Two studies were on patients with gastric cancer, and the other three studies were on patients with colorectal cancer. HIPEC was given to a total of 116 gastric cancer patients and 308 colorectal cancer patients. In all the included studies on patients with gastric cancer, the peritoneal recurrence-free survival was significantly higher in the group that received HIPEC. There was no significant improvement in peritoneal-free survival in patients with colorectal cancer who received HIPEC. HIPEC appears to be effective in preventing peritoneal metastasis in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer without minimal postoperative complications. However, in patients with advanced colorectal malignancy, HIPEC does not seem to play a crucial role in preventing and controlling peritoneal metastasis.

Development and External Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Recurrence-Free Survival After R0 Resection for Stage II/III Gastric Cancer: An International Multicenter Study

Background: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy varies widely among patients with stage II/III gastric cancer (GC), and tools predicting outcomes for this patient subset are lacking. We aimed to develop and validate a nomogram to predict recurrence-free survival (RFS) and the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy after radical resection in patients with stage II/III GC. Methods: Data on patients with stage II/III GC who underwent R0 resection from January 2010 to August 2014 at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital (FMUUH) (n = 1,240; training cohort) were analyzed by Cox regression to identify independent prognostic factors for RFS. A nomogram including these factors was internally and externally validated in FMUUH (n = 306) and a US cohort (n = 111), respectively. Results: The multivariable analysis identified age, differentiation, tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy as associated with RFS. A nomogram including the above 7 factors was significantly more accurate in predicting RFS compared with the 8th AJCC-TNM staging system for patients in the training cohort. The risk of peritoneal metastasis was higher and survival after recurrence was significantly worse among patients calculated by the nomogram to be at high risk than those at low risk. The nomogram's predictive performance was confirmed in both the internal and external validation cohorts. Conclusion: A novel nomogram is available as a web-based tool and accurately predicts long-term RFS for GC after radical resection. The tool can also be used to determine the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy by comparing scores with and without this intervention.

Lidocaine alleviates cisplatin resistance and inhibits migration of MGC-803/DDP cells through decreasing miR-10b

Although chemotherapy is one of the effective means of treating gastric cancer, the resistance of chemotherapeutic drugs has followed. And the mechanisms of resistance are not completely clear. The main aim of this article was to develop a kind of drug that could reduce the resistance of cisplatin on gastric cancer cells. The MGC-803 and MGC-803/DDP cells were treated by cisplatin for 48 h and Lidocaine (Lido) for 24 h. Cell viability, apoptosis, migration and invasion were tested by cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assay, apoptosis assay, western blot, migration and invasion assay. After MGC-803/DDP cells were transfected for 48 h, the expression of microRNA-10b (miR-10b) were detected by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Activation of AKT/mTOR and β-catenin pathways was tested by western blot. Cisplatin caused MGC-803 and MGC-803/DDP cell apoptosis, and MGC-803/DDP cells possessed higher cisplatin resistance than MGC-803 cells. Lido reduced the cisplatin resistance of MGC-803/DDP cells. Besides, Lido inhibited MGC-803/DDP cell migration and invasion. In addition, Lido declined cisplatin resistance by down-regulating miR-10b. Lido also repressed AKT/mTOR and β-catenin pathway by down-regulating miR-10b. This article explained the role of Lido in cisplatin resistance in MGC-803/DDP cells. Furthermore, Lido weakened the cisplatin resistance in MGC-803/DDP cells at least in part through decreasing the expression of miR-10b.

Efficacy of Adjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy Combined with Radical Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer Treatment

Evaluation of the efficacy of the combination of radical surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (ACT) in reducing gastric cancer progression in patients with resectable serosa-invasive gastric cancer in a single institution. In 2015-2016, 19 patients with gastric cancer (stage IIB-IIIC) were included in the trial. The trial protocol comprised radical surgery, HIPEC (cisplatin 50 mg/m² + doxorubicin 50 mg/m², 42 °C, 1 hour), and 1-8 cycles of ACT (oxaliplatin 100 mg/m² administered on day 1 of each cycle and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m² (or tegafur 10-15 mg/kg) administered twice daily on days 1-14 of each cycle with an interval of 7 days between cycles). Following the ACT treatment, the patients were divided into 2 subgroups-those who underwent up to 6 ACT cycles (1-6 cycles, subgroup ≤ 6-8 patients) and those who underwent 7-8 ACT cycles (subgroup > 6-11 patients). Three-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) for the > 6 subgroup was 91 ± 9%. With a follow-up median of 17 months, 3-year MFS for the ≤ 6 subgroup was not reached - p _log-rank = 0.003. The trial showed that in managing advanced gastric cancer patients (pT4a-4bN0-3 M0) by supplementing radical surgery with ACT-enhanced hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, ACT proved to be highly effective when administered in its full mode of 7-8 cycles compared with its truncated variant of 1-6 cycles.

Does hipec improve outcomes in gastric cancer patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy and radical surgery? A propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been associated with improved survival when compared with surgery alone for non-metastatic gastric cancer patients in randomized trials and meta-analyses. However, little evidence is available regarding the use of HIPEC in nonmetastatic patients who are treated with perioperative chemotherapy and radical surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the putative survival benefit of HIPEC in the subgroup of gastric cancer patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy and surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study that included gastroesophageal junction and gastric cancer patients who were treated with perioperative chemotherapy and curative resection in a single cancer center in the period between 2006 and 2017. In this time period, younger patients with diffuse-type tumors and serosa invasion or positive lymph node disease were often offered an adjuvant HIPEC protocol. This study compared the survival outcomes of these patients to the ones of those who received only perioperative chemotherapy and resection. A 2:1 propensity-score matched analysis for the two groups was also performed, and variables used were postchemotherapy T (ypT) and N (ypN) stages, histology and tumor site.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 269 subjects, 241 treated with chemotherapy and surgery and 28 who also received HIPEC. The mean age was 59 years old (standard deviation: 12.2) and 60% of all individuals were male. A total gastrectomy was performed in 137 patients and a distal resection in 132, with a D2-lymphadenectomy in 97.4% of the sample. Overall 60-day morbidity and mortality rates were 35.3% and 3.3%, respectively. In the HIPEC group, patients were younger, and more frequently had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 1 to 2 classification, tumors located in the gastric body, had diffuse histology, and ypN+ disease. Overall survival (OS; 5 years) results in the HIPEC and no HIPEC group were 59.5% vs 68.7% (P = .453), and disease-free survival (DFS) ones were 49.5% and 65.8% (P = .060), respectively. In the multivariable Cox regression model, ypT and ypN were independent overall and DFS predictors; also, ASA 3 to 4 classification and diffuse histology were associated with worse OS. In the matched analysis, HIPEC did not improve either overall (53.5% vs 59.5%; P = .517) or DFS (50.0% vs 49.5%; P = .993).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with HIPEC in patients who received perioperative chemotherapy and a D2-resection did not improve survival outcomes. Both ypT and ypN stages remained as the most important survival predictors in this cohort.