Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) for unresectable peritoneal metastasis from gastric cancer

Outcomes of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis is common in gastric cancer and linked to poor survival. Treatment of peritoneal metastasis with intraperitoneal chemotherapy has become an accepted practice in some centres. This systematic review and meta-analysis intends to provide a comprehensive evaluation of published evidence for the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for studies reporting the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment gastric cancer with macroscopic peritoneal metastasis was performed up until June 2024. Studies were not eligible for inclusion if they described the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy solely as an adjunct to gastrectomy or cytoreductive surgery. Pooled- and meta-analysis was used to summarise study outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies reporting the outcomes of 2446 gastric cancer patients who received intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment of peritoneal metastasis, were included. Three principal methods of intraperitoneal chemotherapy administration were described: catheter based (normothermic) intraperitoneal chemotherapy (n = 28); pressurised intraperitoneal aerosolised chemotherapy (n = 14), and; hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (n = 11). The proportion of patients with complete peritoneal disease regression after receiving intraperitoneal chemotherapy was 27 % (95%CI, 14-41). Median overall survival determined was 16.4 months (95%CI, 14.4-18.4). Meta-analysis of data from eight studies comparing combined intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy with systemic chemotherapy alone identified a survival benefit for patients receiving intraperitoneal chemotherapy (Hazard ratio 0.57 [95%CI, 0.48-0.67],P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Despite variation in published treatment approaches and a lack of evidence from well-designed clinical trials, intraperitoneal chemotherapy may be considered safe and in selected circumstances efficacious.

Large Unstained Cells: A Predictive Biomarker for Recurrence and Survival in Resected Gastric Cancer

Background and Objectives: Despite advances in surgery and perioperative chemotherapy, locally advanced gastric cancer continues to pose significant challenges, creating a pressing need for biomarkers capable of predicting therapeutic efficacy and survival outcomes. This study evaluates the prognostic and predictive significance of large unstained cells (LUCs), a morphologically distinct subset of white blood cells identified in peripheral blood that remain unstained by standard hematological dyes, as potential indicators of immune competence and treatment response. Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients diagnosed with locally advanced gastric cancer (cT2-4, N0-3) at Ankara Bilkent City Hospital between January 2018 and November 2024. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), stratified by LUC levels. The secondary endpoint was the association between LUC levels and pathological tumor response. Results: A total of 180 patients were analyzed, with a median age of 59 years; a total of 76% were male. The median follow-up period was 16.5 months, during which OS and DFS rates were 82% and 66%, respectively. Most patients were presented with advanced-stage disease, including T3-T4 tumors (91%) and nodal positivity (81%). Stratification by LUC levels revealed significantly shorter DFS (HR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.12-4.01; p = 0.020) and OS (HR: 3.37; 95% CI: 1.26-9.03; p = 0.015) in the low-LUC group compared to the high-LUC group. Furthermore, the high-LUC group exhibited a significantly higher tumor shrinkage rate (ypN0: 60% vs. 44%; p = 0.020), although tumor regression scores were similar across groups. Advanced tumor stage and lack of pathological response were strongly associated with reduced DFS and OS, while poorly cohesive carcinoma histology emerged as a predictor of inferior OS. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that elevated LUC levels are significantly associated with improved DFS and OS, as well as enhanced tumor shrinkage, in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. These findings show the potential of LUCs as a promising biomarker for prognostication and therapeutic stratification in this population, offering a novel avenue for refining clinical decision-making. Further validation through prospective investigations is warranted.

Emerging Trends in the Management of Gastric Malignancy with Peritoneal Dissemination: Same Disease, Heterogeneous Prognosis

Gastric cancer is a significant global contributor to cancer-related mortality. Stage IV gastric cancer represents a significant percentage of patients in Western countries, with peritoneal dissemination being the most prevalent site. Peritoneal disease comprises two distinct entities, macroscopic (P1) and microscopic (P0CY1), which are associated with poor long-term survival rates. Although the present standard of treatment is palliative chemotherapy, a global controversy has arisen concerning specific patients with limited disease burden or conversion to negative lavage cytology following chemotherapy. Available approaches include systemic or intraperitoneal chemotherapy, upfront gastrectomy, and conversion surgery. This review consolidated the current evidence regarding multimodal management, indicating prolonged survival for this distinct subgroup of patients. Considering the complexity of peritoneal metastases, the potential of the multimodal approach unveils promising prospects for identifying the optimal treatment for this particular subset of stage IV patients and thus enhancing their survival outcomes.

Evolution in the Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastases

Despite therapeutic treatments and the growing utilization of multimodal therapies, gastric cancer (GC) remains a highly aggressive malignancy with high mortality worldwide. Much of the complexity in treating GC is due to the high incidence of peritoneal metastasis (PM), with mean overall survival typically ranging from 4 to 10 months. With current systemic therapy, targeted therapies, and immunotherapies continuing to remain ineffective for GC/PM, there has been a significant growing interest in intraperitoneal (IP) therapies for the treatment of GC/PM. In this review, we summarize the development of PM and evolving treatment strategies for GC/PM. Furthermore, we explore the various advancements and outcomes of IP therapies, including heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), neoadjuvant HIPEC, and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC).

Research progress and treatment status of malignant ascites

Malignant ascites (MA), a common and serious complication of various cancers in the abdominal cavity, originates from the extensive infiltration, metastasis, and growth of cancer cells in or on the abdominal cavity, leading to abnormal accumulation of fluid in the abdominal cavity and the formation of MA. MA seriously reduces the quality of life of cancer patients, shortens their survival period, and generally has a poor prognosis. Modern medicine has developed various strategies for the treatment of MA, including targeted supportive treatment, diuretic treatment, abdominal paracentesis, surgical intervention, and intraperitoneal administration therapy. Among them, chemotherapy, as one of the important treatment methods, includes both systemic chemotherapy and intraperitoneal chemotherapy, especially pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and foam-based intraperitoneal chemotherapy (FBIC), providing a new choice for the treatment of MA. In addition, innovative treatment methods such as gas-based intra-abdominal hyperthermia (GIH) combined with dehydration therapy have also shown promising application prospects. This article delves into multiple aspects of MA, including its concept, mechanism of occurrence, clinical manifestations, differential diagnostic methods, and current treatment status and research progress. This comprehensive review aims to provide valuable references for effectively controlling MA, improving cancer patients' quality of life, and prolonging the survival cycle of cancer patients in clinical practice. Malignant ascites (MA) is a common complication of cancer, which originates from the extensive infiltration, metastasis, and growth of cancer cells in the abdominal cavity or peritoneum, leading to abnormal accumulation of peritoneal fluid. It is a common clinical manifestation in the late stage of cancer. Its symptoms are stubborn and recurrent, which can lead to abdominal pain, bloating, poor appetite, fatigue, breathing difficulties, and even multiple organ failure. The median survival time for cancer patients with MA is generally 5 to 6 months. The prognosis is poor, and it is imperative to seek more active and effective treatment plans. This article reviews the research and treatment status of MA, aiming to provide certain value for controlling MA and improving the quality of life of patients.

Emerging Treatment Modalities for Gastric Cancer With Macroscopic Peritoneal Metastases: A Systematic Review

Gastric cancer with macroscopic peritoneal metastases represents a major therapeutic challenge and is associated with a poor prognosis. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new treatment modalities. A systematic search of PubMed was conducted to identify studies published between January 2014 and April 2024. Inclusion criteria were trials investigating novel therapies for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. Data on treatment efficacy, survival outcomes, and side effects were extracted.

Conversion surgery for gastric cancer with PM

It remains unclear whether the application of surgery to gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis prolongs survival. Twenty studies on conversion surgery were reviewed. Key points were the response to chemotherapy, complete resection, and a low tumor burden at the time of surgery. A bidirectional approach has been developed to increase the response rate. There are two different strategies in surgery. The outcomes of ongoing trials may clarify controversial issues.

Important Predictive Factors for the Prognosis of Patients With Peritoneal Metastasis of Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study investigated predictive factors for patients with peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer (PMGC) who underwent conversion cytoreductive surgery (C-CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal intraoperative chemotherapy (HIPEC) after responding to induction chemotherapy (laparoscopic HIPEC [LHIPEC]) followed by concomitant systemic and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (bidirectional intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy [BIC]).

METHODS

Diagnostic laparoscopy was performed for 62 patients with PMGC between January 2017 and December 2022. The patients underwent LHIPEC and BIC induction chemotherapy using intraperitoneal docetaxel (30 mg/m2) and cisplatin (30 mg/m2), and intravenous chemotherapy for three cycles. The predictive parameters for progression-free and overall survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. The optimal cutoff values for Ki-67 parameters were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

The study retrospectively examined 36 (58 %) of 62 patients who responded to induction therapy and underwent C-CRS or HIPEC. A Ki-67 index lower than 10 (p = 0.000), lymph node involvement (LNI) less than 2 (p = 0.039), and an omental lesion size score lower than 0.5 cm (p = 0.002) were predictive of recurrence-free and overall survival in addition to completeness of cytoreduction and the peritoneal cancer index. Cox regression analysis showed that the independent factors associated with recurrence-free survival were decreased Ki-67 expression (≥10 % vs <10 %) (hazard ratio [HR] 4.7; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.6-5.210; p = 0.020) and LNI higher than 2 (HR 1.92; 95% CIS 0.923-4.0; p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Lymph node involvement and decreased Ki-67 expression are independent predictive factors of recurrence-free survival for patients with PMGC after induction chemotherapy.

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) for Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastases: Results from the Lithuanian PIPAC Program

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastases (PM) of gastric cancer (GC) are considered a terminal condition, with reported median survival ranging from 2 to 9 months. Standard treatment typically involves systemic chemotherapy alone or combined with targeted therapy or immunotherapy, though efficacy is limited. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has emerged as a novel technique for treating GC PM, although it remains an experimental treatment under investigation. This study aimed to summarize the outcomes of GC PM treatment with PIPAC from the Lithuanian PIPAC program.

METHODS

All patients who underwent PIPAC for GC PM at Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos between 2015 and 2022 were included in this retrospective study. The safety of PIPAC was assessed by postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Efficacy was evaluated based on the peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI), ascites dynamics throughout the treatment, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 32 patients underwent 71 PIPAC procedures. Intraoperative and postoperative morbidity related to PIPAC occurred after three (4.2%) procedures. Following PIPAC, there was a tendency towards a decrease in median PCI from 10 (Q1 3; Q3 13) to 7 (Q1 2; Q3 12), p = 0.75, and a decrease in median ascites volume from 1300 mL (Q1 500; Q3 3600) at the first PIPAC to 700 mL (Q1 250; Q3 4750) at the last PIPAC, p = 0.56; however, these differences were not statistically significant. The median overall survival after PM diagnosis was 12.5 months (95% CI 10-17), and the median survival after the first PIPAC procedure was 5 months (95% CI 4-10).

CONCLUSIONS

PIPAC is a safe and feasible treatment option for GC PM; however, well-designed prospective studies are needed to fully assess its efficacy.

Modified scoring system for the quantitative assessment of histological regression in peritoneal carcinomatosis after pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy: A pilot study

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is one of the leading causes of death in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Newer locoregional treatment concepts include pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC), the regional application of pressurized chemotherapeutic agents to the abdominal cavity, which is usually performed every 4 to 8 weeks. One of the main challenges of PIPAC therapy remains the objective assessment of treatment response. The present study describes a new scoring system to histologically assess the regression of peritoneal cancer following PIPAC therapy, quantitative assessment of histological regression in peritoneal carcinomatosis (QARP). Peritoneal biopsies from 27 patients with peritoneal metastases undergoing PIPAC were obtained and processed in a standardized fashion. Biopsies were scored according to the QARP grading system. The five-tiered system was graded as follows, Grade 0, no residual tumor cells with regressive changes present; grade 1, 1-25% viable tumor cells per tumor focus with regressive changes present; grade 2, 26-50% viable tumor cells per tumor focus with regressive changes present; grade 3, 51-75% viable tumor cells per tumor focus with few regressive changes; grade 4, >75% viable tumor cells per tumor focus with minimal or no regressive changes. Based on the new grading system, the study cohort was divided into QARP responders and QARP non-responders following PIPAC treatment. Higher QARP scores were significantly correlated with higher PCI scores (r=0.32; P=0.007). However, no difference in overall survival was detected between QARP responders and QARP non-responders. Further studies are required to ascertain the reproducibility and prognostic significance of QARP.

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in the Treatment of Gastric Cancer: Feasibility, Efficacy and Safety-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is an emerging technique for delivering chemotherapy directly to the peritoneum via a pressurized aerosol. Its growing attention stems from its effectiveness in treating peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) originating from various primary tumors, with gastric cancer (GC) being among the most prevalent. This study aimed to systematically investigate PIPAC's therapeutic role in gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis (GCPM). Methods: The systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searching Pubmed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases. The meta-analysis of relative risks and mean differences compared patients undergoing one or two PIPAC sessions with those completing three or more, assessing various outcomes. Results: Eighteen studies underwent qualitative analysis, and four underwent quantitative analysis. Patients with three or more PIPAC procedures had shorter hospital stays (MD = -1.2; 95%CI (-1.9; -0.5); p < 0.001), higher rates of histopathological response (RR = 1.77, 95%CI 1.08; 2.90; p = 0.023), and significantly improved overall survival (MD = 6.0; 95%CI 4.2; 7.8; p < 0.001). Other outcomes showed no significant differences. Conclusions: PIPAC demonstrated efficacy in carefully selected patients, enhancing histopathologic response rates and overall survival without prolonging hospital stays. This study underscores the necessity for randomized controlled trials and precise selection criteria to refine PIPAC's implementation in clinical practice.

Regional Therapy Approaches for Gastric Cancer with Limited Peritoneal Disease

PURPOSE

Despite advances in systemic therapy, outcomes of patients with gastric cancer (GC) peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) remain poor, in part because of poor penetrance of systemic therapy into peritoneal metastasis due to the plasma-peritoneal barrier and anarchic intra-tumoral circulation. Hence, regional treatment approach with administration of chemotherapy directly into the peritoneal cavity (intraperitoneal, IP) under various conditions, combined with or without cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has remained an area of significant research interest. The purpose of this review is to provide high-level evidence for regional treatment approaches in the management of GCPC with limited peritoneal disease.

METHODS

A review of the current literature and ongoing clinical trials for regional IP therapies for GCPC was performed. Studies included in this review comprise of phase III randomized controlled trials, non-randomized phase II studies, high-impact retrospective studies, and active ongoing clinical trials for each available IP modality.

RESULTS

The three common IP approaches are heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC) and more recently introduced, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC). These IP approaches have been combined with systemic therapy and/or CRS with varying degrees of promising results, demonstrating evidence of improvements in survival rates and peritoneal disease control. Patient selection, optimization of systemic therapy, and completeness of cytoreduction have emerged as major factors influencing the design of contemporary and ongoing trials.

CONCLUSION

IP chemotherapy has a clear role in the management of patients with GCPC, and when combined with CRS in appropriately selected patients has the potential to significantly improve survival. Ongoing and upcoming IP therapy clinical trials hold great promise to shape the treatment paradigm for GCPC.

The role of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for the treatment of primary and secondary peritoneal malignancies-experience from a tertiary care center in Germany

PURPOSE

Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) are commonly known to have a dismal prognosis. Over the past decades, novel techniques such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) have been introduced for the treatment of PSM which could improve the overall survival and quality of life of patients with PSM. The decision to proceed with CRS and HIPEC is often challenging due the complexity of the disease, the extent of the procedure, associated side effects, and potential risks. Here, we present our experience with CRS and HIPEC to add to the ongoing discussion about eligibility criteria, technical approach, and expected outcomes and contribute to the evolution of this powerful and promising tool in the multidisciplinary treatment of patients with primary and secondary PSM.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective chart review was conducted and included a total of 40 patients treated with CRS and HIPEC from April 2020 to September 2022 at the University Hospital Münster Department of Surgery. All patients had histologically confirmed primary or secondary peritoneal malignancies of various primary origins.

RESULTS

Our study included 22 patients with peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer (55%), 8 with pseudomyxoma peritonei (20%), 4 with mesothelioma of the peritoneum (10%), and 6 patients with PSM originating from other primary tumor locations. Median PCI at time of cytoreduction was 4 (0-25). Completeness of cytoreduction score was 0 in 37 patients (92.5%), 1 in two patients (5%), and 2 in one patient (2.5%). Median overall survival across all patients was 3.69 years.

CONCLUSION

Complete cytoreduction during CRS and HIPEC can be achieved for patients with low PCI, for patients with high PCI in low-grade malignancies, and even for patients with initially high PCI in high-grade malignancies following a significant reduction of cancer burden due to extensive preoperative treatment with PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy.

The yield of diagnostic laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage in gastric adenocarcinoma: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) with peritoneal lavage has been adopted as a standard staging procedure for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Evaluation of the value of DL is important given ongoing improvements in diagnostic imaging and treatment. As contemporary data from European centres are sparse, this retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the yield of DL in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer, and to identify predictive factors for peritoneal metastases.

METHODS

Patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach, treated between January 2016 and December 2018, were identified from institutional databases of two high volume European Upper-GI centres. Patients who underwent a DL with peritoneal lavage for potentially curable disease after clinical staging with imaging (cT1-4N0-3M0) were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive DL, defined as macroscopic metastatic disease, positive peritoneal cytology washings (PC+) or locally irresectable disease.

RESULTS

Some 80 of 327 included patients (24.5%) had a positive DL, excluding these patients from neoadjuvant treatment (66 of 327; 20.2%) and/or surgical resection (76 of 327; 23.2%). In 34 of 327 patients (10.3%), macroscopic metastatic disease was seen, with peritoneal deposits in 30 of these patients. Only 16 of 30 patients with peritoneal disease had positive cytology. Some 41 of 327 patients (12.5%) that underwent DL had PC+ in the absence of macroscopic metastases and five patients (1.5%) had an irresectable primary tumour. Diffuse type carcinoma had the highest risk of peritoneal dissemination, irrespective of cT and cN categories.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic yield of staging laparoscopy is high, changing the management in approximately one quarter of patients. DL should be considered in patients with diffuse type carcinoma irrespective of cT and cN categories.

Peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer in a nationwide cohort: Incidence, treatment and survival

The aims of this study were to investigate incidence, risk factors and treatment of synchronous or metachronous peritoneal metastases (PM) from gastric cancer and to estimate survival of these patients using population-based data. Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer in 2015 to 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The incidence of synchronous and metachronous PM were calculated. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the occurrence of PM. Treatment and survival were compared between patients with synchronous and metachronous PM. Of 2206 patients with gastric cancer, 741 (34%) were diagnosed with PM. Of these, 498 (23%) had synchronous PM. The cumulative incidence of metachronous PM in patients who underwent potentially curative treatment (n = 675) was 22.8% at 3 years. A factor associated with synchronous and metachronous PM was diffuse type histology. Patients diagnosed with synchronous PM more often received systemic treatment than patients with metachronous PM (35% vs 18%, respectively, P < .001). Median overall survival was comparable between synchronous and metachronous PM (3.2 vs 2.3 months, respectively, P = .731). Approximately one third of all patients with gastric cancer are diagnosed with PM, either at primary diagnosis or during 3-year follow-up after potentially curative treatment. Patients with metachronous PM less often received systemic treatment than those with synchronous PM but survival was comparable between both groups. Future trials are warranted to detect gastric cancer at an earlier stage and to examine strategies that lower the risk of peritoneal dissemination. Also, specific treatment options for patients with gastric PM should be further investigated.

Oncological outcomes of conversion therapy in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis: a large-scale retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Data on the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who undergo conversion surgery (CS) in gastric cancer (GC) patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) are limited.

METHODS

GC patients with PM who received intraperitoneal (ip) and systemic chemotherapy between April 2015 and January 2021 were enrolled. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with survival. Clinicopathological and survival outcomes were compared between those with CS and those without CS (NCS). The paclitaxel (PTX) plus tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium capsules (S-1) (PS) + ip PTX and oxaliplatin plus S-1 (SOX) + ip PTX groups were matched in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. Oncological and survival data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 540 patients who received ip chemotherapy via subcutaneous port and systemic chemotherapy were analyzed and 268 patients were enrolled, including 113 who underwent CS and 155 who did not. Overall survival (OS) were 27.0 months and 11.8 months in the CS and NCS groups (P < 0.0001), respectively. R0 resection was an independent prognostic factor for patients who underwent CS. The OS of patients with or without ovariectomy was 21.3 or 12.0 months (P < 0.0001). No difference of clinicopathological and survival outcomes was found between the PS + ip PTX and SOX + ip PTX groups.

CONCLUSION

Conversion therapy is safe and adverse events were manageable. CS improves the survival of GC patients with PM after ip and systemic chemotherapy. R0 is an important prognostic factor. Furthermore, outcomes are comparable between the PS + ip PTX and SOX + ip PTX groups.

What is long-term survival in patients with peritoneal metastasis from gastric, pancreatic, or colorectal cancer? A study of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)

Objectives

A definition of long-term survival (LTS) in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), pancreatic cancer (PC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with systemic chemotherapy and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is lacking. We aimed to define LTS and investigate characteristics and treatment response in patients who reached LTS in data from two prospective trials.

Methods

Retrospective study of patients with GC-, PC-, or CRC-PM from the prospective PIPAC-OPC1 and PIPAC-OPC2 studies. The definition of LTS was based on published systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. LTS was defined at the time point where 25 % of the patients were alive in these studies. Histology based response was evaluated by the mean Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) using biopsies obtained prior to PIPAC 3, and defined by a mean PRGS of ≤2.0 or a decrease of mean PRGS of ≥1, compared to baseline.

Results

LTS was defined at 21 (GC), 15 (PC), and 24 (CRC) months. Fifty-one (47.2 %) patients (nine GC, 17 PC, 25 CRC) reached LTS calculated from the date of PM diagnosis. All but one received palliative chemotherapy before PIPAC, and 37 % received bidirectional treatment. More than 90 % of the LTS patients had response according to PRGS. The mOS from PIPAC 1 was 23.3, 12.4, and 28.5 months for GC, PC, and CRC LTS patients.

Conclusions

Patients with PM from GC, PC, and CRC treated with systemic chemotherapy and PIPAC can reach LTS and most show histological response. Causality must be further investigated.

Reasons for stopping Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC): A retrospective study to improve future patient selection

To improve the prognosis and maintain quality of life in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM), a novel treatment has been introduced-pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). The majority of teams propose at least 3 PIPAC procedures. However, for many patients PIPAC is stopped after only one or two procedures. The aim of this study was to identify the reasons for stopping PIPAC after only one or two procedures and to establish a profile of poor candidates. This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all patients who underwent PIPAC in three French expert centers between 2015 and 2021. A total of 268 PIPAC procedures were performed in 89 patients. Of them, 48.3% of patients underwent fewer than three procedures: 28.1% had one, 20.2% two and 51.7% three or more PIPAC procedures. The main reason for stopping PIPAC, regardless of the number of procedures, was disease progression, in 55.8% of cases. Other reasons for stopping PIPAC were non-access to the abdominal cavity (7.9%), conversion to cytoreductive surgery (13.5%), post-PIPAC adverse events (7.9%), patients' wishes (10.1%) and death (2.2%). In univariate analysis, patients who received fewer than three PIPACs less frequently had chemotherapy beforehand (91% vs 100%, p = 0.05), less frequently had bimodal treatment (70% vs 87%, p = 0.04), had more ascites (median 80 ml vs 50 ml, p = 0.05) and more frequently had carcinomatosic ascites (48.8% vs 23.9%, p < 0.01). Performing PIPAC alone in chemotherapy-naïve patients with ascites should be avoided.

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: a single center outline and comparison of different surgical and intraperitoneal treatments

INTRODUCTION

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) has an unfavourable prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) are promising treatment options that have been shown to improve survival. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of different treatments such as systemic chemotherapy, systemic chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC in patients with GCPM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This single-centre retrospective study included 82 patients with GCPM treated between January 2016 and June 2021. After first-line chemotherapy, depending on disease response and burden, the patients were divided into three treatment groups: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis, which was compared among the treatment groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven (45.1%) patients were administered systemic chemotherapy alone, 25 (30.4%) received chemotherapy + PIPAC, and 20 (24.4%) underwent CRS + HIPEC. The CRS + HIPEC group had better OS (median 24 months) than the PIPAC group (15 months, p = 0.01) and chemotherapy group (5 months, p = 0.0001). Following CRS + HIPEC, the postoperative grade 3-4 complication rate was 25%, and no postoperative in-hospital deaths occurred. The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 12 months. Multivariate analysis identified peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) > 7 as an independent predictor of worse DFS. No independent predictors of OS were identified.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with GCPM, we identified a highly selected population with oligometastatic disease. In this group, CRS + HIPEC provided a significant survival advantage with an acceptable major complication rate compared with other available therapies (systemic chemotherapy alone or in combination with PIPAC).

PIPAC for Gastrointestinal Malignancies

The peritoneum is a common site of metastases for gastrointestinal tumors that predicts a poor outcome. In addition to decreased survival, peritoneal metastases (PMs) can significantly impact quality of life from the resulting ascites and bowel obstructions. The peritoneum has been a target for regional therapies due to the unique properties of the blood-peritoneum barrier. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have become accepted treatments for limited-volume peritoneal disease in appendiceal, ovarian, and colorectal malignancies, but there are limitations. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) improves drug distribution and tissue penetration, allowing for a minimally invasive application for patients who are not CRS/HIPEC candidates based on high disease burden. PIPAC is an emerging treatment that may convert the patient to resectable disease, and may increase survival without major morbidity, as indicated by many small studies. In this review, we discuss the rationale and benefits of PIPAC, as well as sentinel papers describing its application for gastric, colorectal, appendiceal, and pancreatobiliary PMs. While no PIPAC device has yet met FDA approval, we discuss next steps needed to incorporate PIPAC into neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment paradigms, as well as palliative settings. Data on active clinical trials using PIPAC are provided.

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.

Bidirectional Approach with PIPAC and Systemic Chemotherapy for Patients with Synchronous Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastases (GCPM)

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the efficacy of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) with systemic chemotherapy as a bidirectional approach for gastric cancer (GC) patients with synchronous peritoneal metastases (SPM).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective PIPAC database was queried for patients who underwent a bidirectional approach between October 2019 and April 2022 at two high-volume GC surgery units in Italy (Verona and Siena). Surgical and oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between October 2019 and April 2022, 74 PIPAC procedures in 42 consecutive patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2 were performed-32 patients treated in Verona and 10 in Siena. Twenty-seven patients (64%) were female and median age at first PIPAC was 60.5 years (I-III quartiles: 49-68 years). Median Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) was 16 (I-III quartiles: 8-26) and 25 patients (59%) had at least two PIPAC procedures. Major complications according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE; 3 and 4) occurred in three (4%) procedures, and, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (>3a), one (1%) severe complication occurred. There were no reoperations or deaths within 30 days. Median overall survival (mOS) from diagnosis was 19.6 months (range 14-24), and mOS from first PIPAC was 10.5 months (range 7-13). Excluding cases with very heavy metastatic peritoneal burden, with PCI from 2 to 26, treated with more than one PIPAC, mOS from diagnosis was 22 months (range 14-39). Eleven patients (26%) underwent curative-intent surgery after a bidirectional approach. R0 was achieved in nine (82%) patients and complete pathological response was obtained in three (27%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient selection is associated with bidirectional approach efficacy and feasibility for SPM GC treatment, which may allow potentially curative surgical radicalization in highly selected cases.

INTRAPERITONEAL CHEMOTHERAPY FOR GASTRIC CANCER WITH PERITONEAL CARCINOMATOSIS: STUDY PROTOCOL OF A PHASE II TRIAL

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal carcinomatosis in gastric cancer is considered a fatal disease, without expectation of definitive cure. As systemic chemotherapy is not sufficient to contain the disease, a multimodal approach associating intraperitoneal chemotherapy with surgery may represent an alternative for these cases.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in stage IV gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis.

METHODS

This study is a single institutional single-arm prospective clinical trial phase II (NCT05541146). Patients with the following inclusion criteria undergo implantation of a peritoneal catheter for intraperitoneal chemotherapy: Stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma; age 18-75 years; Peritoneal carcinomatosis with peritoneal cancer index<12; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0/1; good clinical status; and lab exams within normal limits. The study protocol consists of four cycles of intraperitoneal chemotherapy with paclitaxel associated with systemic chemotherapy. After treatment, patients with peritoneal response assessed by staging laparoscopy undergo conversion gastrectomy.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is the rate of complete peritoneal response. Progression-free and overall survivals are other outcomes evaluated. The study started in July 2022, and patients will be screened for inclusion until 30 are enrolled.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapies for advanced gastric cancer patients have been evaluated in clinical trials but without success in patients with peritoneal metastasis. The treatment proposed in this trial can be promising, with easy catheter implantation and ambulatory intraperitoneal chemotherapy regime. Verifying the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel with systemic chemotherapy is an important progress that this study intends to investigate.

The Role of Staging Laparoscopy for Gastric Cancer Patients: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

A significant proportion of patients diagnosed with gastric cancer is discovered with peritoneal metastases at laparotomy. Despite the continuous improvement in the performance of radiological imaging, the preoperative recognition of such an advanced disease is still challenging during the diagnostic work-up, since the sensitivity of CT scans to peritoneal carcinomatosis is not always adequate. Staging laparoscopy offers the chance to significantly increase the rate of promptly diagnosed peritoneal metastases, thus reducing the number of unnecessary laparotomies and modifying the initial treatment strategy of gastric cancer. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive summary of the current literature regarding the role of staging laparoscopy in the management of gastric cancer. Indications, techniques, accuracy, advantages, and limitations of staging laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology were discussed. Furthermore, a focus on current evidence regarding the application of artificial intelligence and image-guided surgery in staging laparoscopy was included in order to provide a picture of the future perspectives of this technique and its integration with modern tools in the preoperative management of gastric cancer.

Oncological Outcomes After Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in the Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

BACKGROUND

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new surgical technique for the treatment of initially unresectable peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Our objective was to assess its oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Between July 2016 and September 2020, data from 100 PIPAC procedures with oxaliplatin or doxorubicin-cisplatin in 49 patients with PC (all etiologies) were analyzed. We studied the evolution of the peritoneal cancer index (PCI), the need for radical surgery (R0), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The patients' median age was 65 (59; 71) years, and 55.1% were women. Median PIPAC procedures per patient were 2 (1-3), and 28 (57.1%) underwent more than one PIPAC procedure. Median PCI at the first PIPAC was 19 (15-22). PCI decreased for 37%, remained stable for 29.6%, and increased for 33.4% patients. Four (8.3%) underwent radical R0 surgery after PIPAC. After a median follow-up of 16.1 months (1.5-90.1), the median overall survival from PC diagnosis was 29.1 months (14.8-34.3), with a median gastric and colorectal PC survival of 11.3 (7.2-34.3) and 29.1 months (16.1-31) respectively. Overall survival after the first PIPAC session was 11.6 months (6-17.3), with median survival after gastric and colorectal PCs being 6 (2.9-15.5) and 13.3 months (5-17.6), respectively. Stratification of patients according to the number of lines of systemic chemotherapy, PIPAC procedures, and the chronology of PC onset did not result in a significant difference in survival.

CONCLUSION

The OS was in line with the literature. PIPAC could delay oncological progression and improve survival. These encouraging results justify the ongoing and future evaluations of PIPAC by prospective randomized trials.

Updated Incidence, Treatment and Survival of a Nationwide Cohort of Patients with Peritoneal Metastases of Unknown Origin

The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, treatment and survival of patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) of unknown origin. All Dutch patients diagnosed in 2017 and 2018 with PM of unknown origin (PM-CUP) were evaluated. Data were extracted from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients with PM-CUP were categorized into the following histological subtypes: 1) adenocarcinoma, 2) mucinous adenocarcinoma, 3) carcinoid, 4) unspecified carcinoma and 5) other. Treatments were compared between the different histological subtypes in patients with PM-CUP. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method for all patients with cancer of unknown origin and between histological subtypes in patients with PM-CUP. Significant differences in OS were assessed by using the log-rank test. In total, 3026 patients were diagnosed with cancer of unknown origin, 513 (17%) among them were diagnosed with PM-CUP. Most PM-CUP patients received best supportive care only (76%), whereas 22% received systemic treatment and 4% underwent metastasectomy. Median OS was 1.1 months for all patients with PM-CUP but varied from 0.6 months to 30.5 months depending on the underlying histology. In this study, PM-CUP were diagnosed in 17% of all patients with cancer of unknown primary and the reported survival in this cohort was extremely poor. Since survival differed among histological subtypes and recently more treatment options became available for a selected group of patients with peritoneal malignancies, it is of great importance to identify the histology of the metastases and whenever possible the primary tumor.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy, reasons for interrupting treatment: a systematic review of the literature

Objectives

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) gives encouraging results in the treatment of peritoneal metastasis (PM). The current recommendations require at least 3 sessions of PIPAC. However, some patients do not complete the full treatment course and stop after only 1 or 2 procedures, hence the limited benefit. A literature review was performed, with search terms including "PIPAC" and "pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy."

Content

Only articles describing the causes for premature termination of the PIPAC treatment were analysed. The systematic search identified 26 published clinical articles related to PIPAC and reporting causes for stopping PIPAC.

Summary

The series range from 11 to 144 patients, with a total of 1352 patients treated with PIPAC for various tumours. A total of 3088 PIPAC treatments were performed. The median number of PIPAC treatments per patient was 2.1, the median PCI score at the time of the first PIPAC was 19 and the number of patients who did not complete the recommended 3 sessions of PIPAC was 714 (52.8%). Disease progression was the main reason for early termination of the PIPAC treatment (49.1%). The other causes were death, patients' wishes, adverse events, conversion to curative cytoreductive surgery and other medical reasons (embolism, pulmonary infection, etc…).

Outlook

Further investigations are necessary to better understand the causes for interrupting PIPAC treatment and also improving the selection of patients who are most likely to benefit from PIPAC.

Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: Current Status and Prospects for Treatment

Gastric cancer (GC) has a poor prognostic and only one in four patients will have survived by 5 years after diagnosis. These poor results are due to the fact that most patients are diagnosed in advanced stages; peritoneal metastases (PM) are especially frequent and are difficult to treat. Currently, PM are considered a terminal stage of GC with a poor survival rate and are treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy. Since the beginning of the century, the treatment of PM from different origins has evolved; cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have become the treatment of choice for many malignant diseases that affect the peritoneum. CRS and HIPEC have also been used for patients with GC and PM, achieving survival results that have never been achieved when using systemic chemotherapy alone. The use of HIPEC can even prevent the development of peritoneal recurrences in patients with locally advanced GC as adjuvant therapy, can reduce the volume of peritoneal disease as neoadjuvant therapy, and can control symptoms in a palliative setting. The aim of this review is to collate the current scientific evidence regarding the treatment of PM of GC origin with surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Application and progress of palliative therapy in advanced gastric carcinomas

Gastric carcinomas have high morbidity and mortality. It produces no noticeable symptoms in the early stage while causing complex complications in its advanced stage, making treatment difficult. Palliative therapy aims to relieve the symptoms of cancer patients and focuses on improving their quality of life. At present, five palliative therapies for advanced gastric carcinomas are offered: resection, gastrojejunostomy, stenting, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. In recent years, palliative therapy has been used in the clinical treatment of advanced gastric carcinomas and related complications because of its efficacy in gastric outlet obstruction and gastric bleeding. In the future, multimodal and interdisciplinary palliative therapies can be applied to control general symptoms to improve patients’ condition, prolong their lifespan and improve their quality of life.

Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy in Combination with Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in Patients with Gastric Cancer at High Risk of Recurrence-The PIPAC-OPC4 Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) are at high risk of peritoneal recurrence despite perioperative chemotherapy and radical resection. This study evaluated feasibility and safety of laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy in combination with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).

METHODS

This was a prospective, controlled bi-institutional study in patients with GAC at high risk of recurrence treated with PIPAC with cisplatin and doxorubicin (PIPAC C/D) after laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy. High risk was defined as a poorly cohesive subtype with predominance of signet-ring cells, clinical stage ≥ T3 and/or ≥ N2, or positive peritoneal cytology. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected before and after resection. Cisplatin (10.5 mg/m²) and doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m²) were aerosolized after anastomosis (flow 0.5-0.8 ml/s, maximum pressure 300 PSI). Treatment was feasible and safe if ≤ 20% had Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3b surgical complications or CTCAE ≥ 4 medical adverse events within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), peritoneal lavage cytology, and completion of postoperative systemic chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were treated with a D2 gastrectomy and PIPAC C/D. The median age was 61 years (range 24-76), there were eleven female patients, and 20 patients had preoperative chemotherapy. There was no mortality. Two patients had grade 3b complications that were potentially related to PIPAC C/D (one anastomotic leakage, and one late duodenal blow-out). One patient had severe neutropenia, and nine patients had moderate pain. The LOS was 6 days (4-26). One patient had positive peritoneal lavage cytology before resection, and none were positive after. Fifteen patients had postoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy in combination with PIPAC C/D is feasible and safe.

10 Years of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel intraperitoneal drug delivery method of low-dose chemotherapy as a pressurized aerosol in patients affected by peritoneal cancer of primary or secondary origin. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of assessing the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of PIPAC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using Medline and Web of Science databases from 1 January 2011, to inception, to 31 December 2021. Data were independently extracted by two authors. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of studies. Meta-analysis was performed for pathological response, radiological response, PCI variation along treatment, and for patients undergoing three or more PIPAC. Pooled analyses were performed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation, and 95% CIs were calculated using Clopper-Pearson exact CIs in all instances.

RESULTS

A total of 414 papers on PIPAC were identified, and 53 studies considering 4719 PIPAC procedure in 1990 patients were included for analysis. The non-access rate or inability to perform PIPAC pooled rate was 4% of the procedures performed. The overall proportion of patients who completed 3 or more cycles of PIPAC was 39%. Severe toxicities considering CTCAE 3-4 were 4% (0% to 38.5%). In total, 50 studies evaluated deaths within the first 30 postoperative days. In the included 1936 patients were registered 26 deaths (1.3%). The pooled analysis of all the studies reporting a pathological response was 68% (95% CI 0.61-0.73), with an acceptable heterogeneity (I2 28.41%, p = 0.09). In total, 10 papers reported data regarding the radiological response, with high heterogeneity and a weighted means of 15% (0% to 77.8%). PCI variation along PIPAC cycles were reported in 14 studies. PCI diminished, increased, or remained stable in eight, one and five studies, respectively, with high heterogeneity at pooled analysis. Regarding survival, there was high heterogeneity. The 12-month estimated survival from first PIPAC for colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, gynecological cancer and hepatobiliary/pancreatic cancer were, respectively, 53%, 25%, 59% and 37%.

CONCLUSIONS

PIPAC may be a useful treatment option for selected patients with PM, with acceptable grade 3 and 4 toxicity and promising survival benefit. Meta-analysis showed high heterogeneity of data among up-to-date available studies. In a subset analysis per primary tumor origin, pathological tumor regression was documented in 68% of the studies with acceptable heterogeneity. Pathological regression seems, therefore, a reliable outcome for PIPAC activity and a potential surrogate endpoint of treatment response. We recommend uniform selection criteria for patients entering a PIPAC program and highlight the urgent need to standardize items for PIPAC reports and datasets.

Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Unresectable Peritoneal Surface Malignancies

Malignancies of the peritoneal cavity are associated with a dismal prognosis. Systemic chemotherapy is the gold standard for patients with unresectable peritoneal disease, but its intraperitoneal effect is hampered by the peritoneal-plasma barrier. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, which is administered repeatedly into the peritoneal cavity through a peritoneal implanted port, could provide a novel treatment modality for this patient population. This review provides a systematic overview of intraperitoneal used drugs, the performed clinical studies so far, and the complications of the peritoneal implemental ports. Several anticancer drugs have been studied for intraperitoneal application, with the taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel as the most commonly used drug. Repeated intraperitoneal chemotherapy, mostly in combination with systemic chemotherapy, has shown promising results in Phase I and Phase II studies for several tumor types, such as gastric cancer, ovarian cancer, colorectal cancer, and pancreatic cancer. Two Phase III studies for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in gastric cancer have been performed so far, but the results regarding the superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy alone, are contradictory. Pressurized intraperitoneal administration, known as PIPAC, is an alternative way of administering intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and the first prospective studies have shown a tolerable safety profile. Although intraperitoneal chemotherapy might be a standard treatment option for patients with unresectable peritoneal disease, more Phase II and Phase III studies focusing on tolerability profiles, survival rates, and quality of life are warranted in order to establish optimal treatment schedules and to establish a potential role for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the approach to unresectable peritoneal disease.

Treatment of Peritoneal Metastasis with Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy: Results from the Prospective PIPAC-OPC2 Study

BACKGROUND

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a local treatment for peritoneal metastasis (PM). Prospective data are scarce and evaluation of treatment response remains difficult. This study evaluated the use of the Peritoneal Regression Grading score (PRGS) and its prognostic value.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, controlled phase II trial in patients with PM from gastrointestinal, gynaecological, hepatopancreatobiliary, primary peritoneal, or unknown primary cancer. Patients in performance status 0-1, with a non-obstructed gastrointestinal tract, and a maximum of one extraperitoneal metastasis were eligible. Colorectal or appendiceal PM had PIPAC with oxaliplatin, other primaries had PIPAC with cisplatin and doxorubicin. Biopsies were taken at each PIPAC and evaluated using the PRGS. Quality-of-life questionnaires were reported at baseline and after three PIPACs.

RESULTS

One hundred ten patients were treated with 336 PIPACs (median 3, range 1-12). One hundred patients had prior palliative chemotherapy and 45 patients received bidirectional treatment. Complete or major histological response to treatment (PRGS 1-2) was observed in 38 patients (61%) who had three PIPACs, which was the only independent prognostic factor in a multivariate analysis. The median overall survival (mOS) from PIPAC 1 was 10 months, while patients with PM from gastric, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer had a mOS of 7.4, 16.7, and 8.2 months, respectively. Global health scores were significantly reduced, but patients were less fatigued, nauseated, constipated, and had better appetite after three PIPACs.

CONCLUSIONS

PIPAC with oxaliplatin or cisplatin and doxorubicin was able to induce a major or complete histological response during three PIPACs, which may provide significant prognostic information, both at baseline and after treatment.

Hospitalization cost of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)

INTRODUCTION

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new surgical technique for the treatment of unresectable peritoneal carcinomatosis. Very little data is available on the costs of this treatment in France as there is currently no code for PIPAC in the French Common Classification of Medical Acts (CCAM). Our objective was to estimate the mean cost of hospitalization for PIPAC in two French public teaching hospitals.

METHODS

The mean cost of hospitalization was estimated from the mean fixed-rate remuneration paid to the hospital and the mean additional costs of treatment paid by the hospital. At discharge a patient's hospitalization is classified into a diagnosis related group, which determines the fixed-rate remuneration paid to the hospital (obtained from the national hospitals database - PMSI). Costs of medical devices and drug treatments specific to PIPAC, not covered by the fixed-rate remuneration, were obtained from the hospital pharmacies.

RESULTS

Between July 2016 and November 2021, 205 PIPAC procedures were performed on 79 patients (mean procedures per patient = 2.6). Mean operating room occupancy was 165 min. The mean fixed-rate remuneration received by the hospitals per PIPAC hospitalization was €4031. The actual mean cost per hospitalization was €6562 for a mean length-of-stay of 3.3 days. Thus, each PIPAC hospitalization cost the hospital €2531 on average.

CONCLUSION

The current reimbursement of PIPAC treatment by the national health system is insufficient and represents only 61% of the real cost. The creation of a new fixed-rate remuneration for PIPAC taking into account this cost differential is necessary.

Pressurised intraperitoneal aerosolised chemotherapy (PIPAC) for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: A systematic review by the PIPAC UK collaborative

INTRODUCTION

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases (GCPM) carries a poor prognosis. Pressurised Intraperitoneal Aerosolised Chemotherapy (PIPAC) offers pharmacokinetic advantages over intravenous therapy, resulting in higher chemotherapy concentrations in peritoneal deposits, and potentially reduced systemic absorption/toxicity. This review evaluates efficacy, tolerability and impact on quality of life (QOL) of PIPAC for GCPM.

METHODS

Following registration with PROSPERO (CRD42021281500), MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were searched for PIPAC in patients with peritoneal metastases, in accordance with PRISMA standards RESULTS: Across 18 included reports representing 751 patients with GCPM (4 prospective, 11 retrospective, 3 abstracts, no phase III studies), median overall survival (mOS) was 8 - 19.1 months, 1-year OS 49.8-77.9%, complete response (PRGS1) 0-35% and partial response (PRGS2/3) 0-83.3%. Grade 3 and 4 toxicity was 0.7-25% and 0-4.1% respectively. Three studies assessing QOL reported no significant difference.

CONCLUSION

PIPAC may offer promising survival benefits, toxicity, and QOL for GCPM.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Feasibility and Safety of Taxane-PIPAC in Patients with Peritoneal Malignancies-a Retrospective Bi-institutional Study

Taxanes have a favorable pharmacokinetic profile for intraperitoneal application. We report our initial experience with taxane-PIPAC (pressurized intraperitoneal chemotherapy) for unresectable peritoneal metastases from different primary sites in terms of safety, feasibility, response rate, and conversion to resectability. In this retrospective study, PIPAC was performed alone or in combination with systemic chemotherapy. Paclitaxel was used as a single agent, whereas docetaxel was used in combination with cisplatin-adriamycin or oxaliplatin-adriamycin. From December 2019 to December 2021, 47 patients underwent 82 PIPAC procedures (1 PIPAC in 55.3%, 2 in 29.7%, 3 in 14.8%). The most common primary sites were ovarian cancer (31.9%), gastric cancer (23.4%), and colorectal cancer (21.2%). Docetaxel-cisplatin-adriamycin was used in 33 (70.2%) patients, docetaxel-oxaliplatin-adriamycin in 12 (25.5%), and paclitaxel alone in 2 (4.2%) patients. Grade 1-2 complications were observed in 24 (51%) and grade 3-4 complications in 6 (12.7%) patients (8.5% of 82 PIPACs). 16/47 (34.0%) patients had a clinical response to PIPAC. The mean PCI was 25.9 ± 9.2 for the first PIPACs and 22.4 ± 9 for the subsequent PIPACs with an average reduction of 3.6 points [change in PCI ranged from - 14 to + 8]. The PRGS was 1/2 in 4/47 (8.5%) patients (19.0% patients with > 1 PIPAC). A reduction in ascites was observed in 35.4% presenting with ascites. Nine (19.1%) patients had conversion to operability leading to a subsequent cytoreductive surgery in 8 (17%) patients. PIPAC with docetaxel is feasible and safe. The role of PIPAC with both docetaxel and paclitaxel either alone or in combination with other drugs should be investigated in prospective studies.

Advances in the management of peritoneal malignancies

Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs) are usually associated with a poor prognosis. Nonetheless, in line with advances in the management of most abdominopelvic metastatic diseases, considerable progress has been made over the past decade. An improved understanding of disease biology has led to the more accurate prediction of neoplasia aggressiveness and the treatment response and has been reflected in the proposal of new classification systems. Achieving complete cytoreductive surgery remains the cornerstone of curative-intent treatment of PSMs. Alongside centralization in expert centres, enabling the delivery of multimodal and multidisciplinary strategies, preoperative management is a crucial step in order to select patients who are most likely to benefit from surgery. Depending on the specific PSM, the role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy and of perioperative systemic chemotherapy, in particular, in the neoadjuvant setting, is established in certain scenarios but questioned in several others, although more prospective data are required. In this Review, we describe advances in all aspects of the management of PSMs including disease biology, assessment and improvement of disease resectability, perioperative management, systemic therapy and pre-emptive management, and we speculate on future research directions.

Comprehensive Treatment Algorithms of the Swiss Peritoneal Cancer Group for Peritoneal Cancer of Gastrointestinal Origin

Peritoneal cancer (PC) is a dire finding, yet in selected patients, long-term survival is possible. Complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) together with combination immunochemotherapy is essential to achieve cure. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) are increasingly added to the multimodal treatment. The Swiss Peritoneal Cancer Group (SPCG) is an interdisciplinary group of expert clinicians. It has developed comprehensive treatment algorithms for patients with PC from pseudomyxoma peritonei, peritoneal mesothelioma, gastric, and colorectal origin. They include multimodal neoadjuvant treatment, surgical resection, and palliative care. The indication for and results of CRS HIPEC and PIPAC are discussed in light of the current literature. Institutional volume and clinical expertise required to achieve best outcomes are underlined, while inclusion of patients considered for CRS HIPEC and PIPAC in a clinical registry is strongly advised. The present recommendations are in line with current international guidelines and provide the first comprehensive treatment proposal for patients with PC including intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The SPCG comprehensive treatment algorithms provide evidence-based guidance for the multimodal care of patients with PC of gastrointestinal origin that were endorsed by all Swiss clinicians routinely involved in the multimodal care of these challenging patients.

Integration of Genomic Biology Into Therapeutic Strategies of Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis

The peritoneum is a common site of metastasis in advanced gastric cancer (GC). Diagnostic laparoscopy is now routinely performed as part of disease staging, leading to an earlier diagnosis of synchronous peritoneal metastasis (PM). The biology of GCPM is unique and aggressive, leading to a dismal prognosis. These tumors tend to be resistant to traditional systemic therapy, and yet, this remains the current standard-of-care recommended by most international clinical guidelines. As this is an area of unmet clinical need, several translational studies and clinical trials have focused on addressing this specific disease state. Advances in genomic sequencing and molecular profiling have revealed several promising therapeutic targets and elucidated novel biology, particularly on the role of the surrounding tumor microenvironment in GCPM. Peritoneal-specific clinical trials are being designed with a combination of locoregional therapeutic strategies with systemic therapy. In this review, we summarize the new knowledge of cancer biology, advances in surgical techniques, and emergence of novel therapies as an integrated strategy emerges to address GCPM as a distinct clinical entity.

Poorly cohesive cells gastric carcinoma including signet-ring cell cancer: Updated review of definition, classification and therapeutic management

While the incidence of gastric cancer (GC) in general has decreased worldwide in recent decades, the incidence of diffuse cancer historically comprising poorly cohesive cells-GC (PCC-GC) and including signet ring cell cancer is rising. Literature concerning PCC-GC is scarce and unclear, mostly due to a large variety of historically used definitions and classifications. Compared to other histological subtypes of GC, PCC-GC is nevertheless characterized by a distinct set of epidemiological, histological and clinical features which require a specific diagnostic and therapeutic approach. The aim of this review was to provide an update on the definition, classification and therapeutic strategies of PCC-GC. We focus on the updated histological definition of PCC-GC, along with its implications on future treatment strategies and study design. Also, specific considerations in the diagnostic management are discussed. Finally, the impact of some recent developments in the therapeutic management of GC in general such as the recently validated taxane-based regimens (5-Fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel), the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy as well as pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy and targeted therapy have been reviewed in depth for their relative importance for PCC-GC in particular.

Assessment of postoperative pain after pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) in the treatment of peritoneal metastasis

PURPOSE

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new surgical technique, for the treatment of initially unresectable peritoneal metastasis (PM). Our objective was to assess postoperative pain and morbidity.

METHODS

Between July 2016 and September 2020, data from 100 consecutive PIPAC procedures with oxaliplatin (PIPAC Ox) or doxorubicin-cisplatin (PIPAC C/D) in 49 patients with PM (all etiologies) were analyzed. Pain was self-assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) of 0-10.

RESULTS

The median PIPAC procedures per patient were 2 [1-3]. Patients indicated greatest pain at 4 pm on the day of the procedure (D0) and on postoperative D1 at 8 am and 4 pm. Postprocedural moderate-to-severe pain (VAS 4-10) was more frequent with PIPAC Ox than with PIPAC C/D, respectively 14 (36.8%) vs 7 (13.5%); p = 0.010. Hospitalization was longer for patients with moderate-to-severe pain than for others (median 4 days [3-7] vs 3 days [2-4], p = 0.004). Multivariate analysis identified oxaliplatin as a factor associated with greater pain (OR [95% CI], 2.95 [1.10-7.89]. Opiate administration was similar after PIPAC Ox and PIPAC C/D procedures, p = 0.477.

CONCLUSION

PIPAC was well-tolerated, and pain was well-controlled in the majority of patients. Pain was greatest at 4 pm on D0 and 8 am and 4 pm on D1. PIPAC Ox is associated with greater pain than PIPAC C/D, independently of opiate treatment. Moderate-to-severe pain was associated with longer hospital stays.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) in multimodal therapy for patients with oligometastatic peritoneal gastric cancer: a randomized multicenter phase III trial PIPAC VEROne

Objectives

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is the most frequent site of metastases in patients with gastric cancer. Current standard treatment is palliative systemic chemotherapy with very poor prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) resulted in long-term benefits in selected patients. Among patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, a distinctive subset is oligometastatic disease which is characterized by low metastatic burden. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a recent technique of intraperitoneal chemotherapy used in combination with systemic chemotherapy with promising results.

Methods

PIPAC VER-One is a prospective, randomized, multicenter phase III clinical trial that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the use of PIPAC in combination with systemic chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer and synchronous positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal metastases (peritoneal cancer index [PCI] ≤6). Patients will be randomized into two arms: arm A (control) treated with standard systemic chemotherapy and arm B (experimental) treated with a bidirectional scheme including PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy.

Results

Primary endpoint is the secondary resectability rate. Secondary endpoints are: overall survival (OS), pregression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), histological response assessed both on primary tumor and peritoneal lesions, quality of life (QoL), complication rate (CTCAE v5), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).

Conclusions

The role of PIPAC in multimodal treatment for oligometastatic gastric cancer will be investigated in this trial.

Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis-A Comprehensive Review of Current Intraperitoneal Treatment Modalities

The treatment of patients with peritoneal metastasis from gastric cancer continues to evolve. With various forms of intraperitoneal drug delivery available, it is now possible to reach the sites of peritoneal metastases, which were otherwise sub-optimally covered by systemic chemotherapy, owing to the blood peritoneal barrier. We conducted a narrative review based on an extensive literature research, highlighting the current available intraperitoneal treatment options, which resulted in improved survival in well-selected patients of peritoneally metastasized gastric cancer. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy showed promising results in four different treatment modalities: prophylactic, neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and palliative. It is now possible to choose the type of intraperitoneal treatment/s in combination with systemic treatment/s, depending on patients' general condition and peritoneal disease burden, thus providing individualized treatment to these patients. Randomized controlled trials for the different treatment modalities were mainly conducted in Asia and lack further validation in the other parts of the world. Most recent application tools, such as pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy, seem promising and need to pass the ongoing clinical trials.

Intraperitoneal therapy for gastric cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis

INTRODUCTION

Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) is one of the most aggressive malignancies worldwide and has a poor prognosis. Multidisciplinary therapies are used in its treatment, but the prognosis for GAC patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) remains poor and there is no effective established approach.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the results of recent clinical studies and recent advances in the management, including surgery, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. In this review, keywords were searched in combination with 'peritoneal carcinomatosis' and 'gastric cancer' in PubMed, and then studies that evaluated peritoneal carcinomatosis associated with gastric cancer were identified through reading them. Several studies were quoted at second hand. Despite recent advances in therapeutic approaches such as systemic chemotherapy, immunotherapy, intraperitoneal chemotherapy, debulking surgery, thermal hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and best supportive therapy, further studies are necessary. This review also summarizes molecular biology of GAC patients with PM.

EXPERT OPINION

Each modality is advancing and some have shown therapeutic effects, but none have become standard treatments that exhibit remarkable effects. To improve the prognosis of GAC patients with PM, large-scale clinical trials and further basic research are required.

Review of Regional Therapies for Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases

Simple Summary

Gastric cancer is usually diagnosed at late stages and is associated with poor five-year survival rates. Metastasis to the peritoneal cavity is common and leads to even worse outcomes. Currently, the mainstay of treatment for metastatic gastric cancer is systemic chemotherapy or supportive care. These recommendations remain despite evidence that suggests systemic therapy has poor penetration into the abdominal cavity, limiting efficacy against peritoneal disease. Newer treatments have been developed to address this problem, specifically regional therapies aimed at delivering chemotherapy directly into the peritoneal cavity to eradicate tumor cells. These novel therapies include hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy. Regional therapies may also be combined with surgery to remove both macroscopic and microscopic disease. Although more clinical trials are needed to evaluate its efficacy, early studies have shown promising outcomes with intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Abstract

Gastric cancer carries a poor prognosis and is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Patients with gastric cancer who develop peritoneal metastases have an even more dismal prognosis, with median survival time measured in months. Since studies have demonstrated that systemic chemotherapy has poor penetration into the peritoneum, multimodal treatment with intraperitoneal chemotherapy has been proposed for the treatment of peritoneal metastases and has become the foundation for newer therapeutic techniques and clinical trials. These include heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with cytoreductive surgery (CRS), which involves the application of heated chemotherapy into the abdomen with or without tumor debulking surgery; normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC), in which non-heated chemotherapy can be delivered into the abdomen via a peritoneal port allowing for repeat dosing; and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC), a newer technique of pressurized and aerosolized chemotherapy delivered into the abdomen during laparoscopy. Early results with intraperitoneal chemotherapy have shown promise in increasing disease-free and overall survival in select patients. Additionally, there may be a palliative effect of these regional therapies. In this review, we explore and summarize these different intraperitoneal chemotherapy treatment regimens for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases.