2022 Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International Consensus on HIPEC Regimens for Peritoneal Malignancies: Colorectal Cancer

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy after upfront cytoreductive surgery for stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: Follow-up of long-term survival

INTRODUCTION

The survival benefit of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been well defined at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery, but the role of HIPEC remains uncertain for patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in the upfront setting. The present study aimed to report the updated long-term survival outcomes after 5 years of follow-up from our previous multicenter retrospective cohort study to compare primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS) plus HIPEC with PCS alone among women with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was conducted at five high-volume gynecological medical centers in China from January 2010 to May 2017. Eligible patients with complete data were treated with either PCS combined with HIPEC or PCS alone. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was updated to compare PCS plus HIPEC with PCS alone. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method based on a propensity score model for each patient was used to control the confounding factors and evaluate the effect of HIPEC.

RESULTS

Data from 789 patients, a total of 584 eligible stage III epithelial ovarian cancer patients were ultimately included in the analysis (PCS-plus-HIPEC group, n = 425; PCS-alone group, n = 159). After IPTW adjustment, the median OS was 44.5 (95% CI, 40.1-49.1) months in the PCS-plus-HIPEC group and 32.4 (95% CI, 28.8-40.3) months in the PCS-alone group (weighted hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.93; p = 0.006). At 5 years, the OS rates were 37.9% (95% CI, 33.0%-42.8%) in the PCS-plus-HIPEC group and 26.4% (95% CI, 18.9%-34.6%) in the PCS-alone group (p = 0.007). After stratification into optimal and suboptimal cytoreduction subgroups, patients in the PCS-plus-HIPEC group maintained a greater association with improved OS than those in the PCS-alone group. Among the women who underwent optimal cytoreduction in the PCS-plus-HIPEC group and PCS-alone group, the median OS was 49.9 (95% CI, 45.2-58.4) months and 37.8 (95% CI, 30.5-53.0) months (p = 0.042) while the 5-year OS rate was 43.7% (95% CI, 37.7%-49.6%) and 33.2% (95% CI, 23.3%-43.5%), respectively (p = 0.040). Meanwhile, for those treated with suboptimal cytoreduction subgroup in the PCS-plus-HIPEC and PCS-alone groups, the median OS was 28.4 (95% CI, 22.2-39.9) months and 20.6 (95% CI, 10.6-32.4) months (p = 0.099) while the 5-year OS rate was 22.4% (95% CI, 15.1%-30.5%) and 12.2% (95% CI, 4.4%-24.2%), respectively (p = 0.060). The median follow-up period was 87.2 (95% CI, 85.1-92.7) months.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated results indicate that the addition of HIPEC is associated with improved long-term survival outcomes beyond 5 years for patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer in the upfront setting.

Postoperative leukopenia after cytoreductive surgery and hypertherm intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal carcinomatosis- causes and implication on outcomes in a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Leukocytes have been reported to have tumor stimulating effects in colorectal cancer, among other malignancies. In line with this, earlier research has shown improved disease-free survival in patients with postoperative neutropenia compared to non-neutropenic patients following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hypertherm intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

AIM

To evaluate the impact of postoperative leukopenia after CRS and HIPEC on recurrence rate, survival, and risk of complications.

METHODS

All CRS and HIPEC-procedures for colorectal adenocarcinoma in the national Swedish HIPEC-registry since 2015 and local registries in Uppsala and Malmö since 2003 until December 31st, 2021, were included (n = 921). Patients who did not complete a full CRS and HIPEC procedure (n = 99), had incomplete macroscopic cytoreduction (n = 25) or a lack of information on leukocyte count (n = 213) were excluded, resulting in 584 analyzed cases. Primary outcome was overall recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and perioperative complications.

RESULTS

Postoperative leukopenia was observed in 54 (9.2%) cases of which 32 (5.5%) developed severe leukopenia. No differences in patient characteristics were noted between those with or without leukopenia. There were no differences in 3-year recurrence rate, overall survival or 3-year recurrence-free survival, between the groups. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment, HR 1.32 (95% CI: 1.02-1.71), higher PCI-score, HR 1.50 (95% CI: 1.09-2.05) and higher pN-stage HR 2.52 (95% CI: 1.74-3.65) were associated with higher 3-year recurrence rate. 3-year mortality was associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment, HR 1.82 (95% CI: 1.06-3.11), severe postoperative complication, HR 2.39 (95% CI: 1.39-4.13) and high PCI-score, HR 2.60 (95% CI: 1.31-5.14). Treatment with combined oxaliplatin/irinotecan, HR 12.34 (95% CI: 4.51-33.74) was associated with developing postoperative leukopenia. Longer operation time, HR 2.30 (95% CI: 1.55-3.42), and severe leukopenia, HR 3.50 (95% CI: 1.25-9.77) were associated with postoperative complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative leukopenia did not impact recurrence rate or long-term survival in a statistically significant manner. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and high PCI-score were associated with both recurrent disease and mortality within 3 years.

The Mitomycin versus Oxaliplatin debate on HIPEC in colorectal cancers - An updated systematic review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Following the PRODIGE-7 trial, surgeons have shifted to the use of Mitomycin-based HIPEC from Oxaliplatin for colorectal peritoneal metastasis. While preclinical studies have demonstrated the superiority of Mitomycin over oxaliplatin, clinical studies report variable results. The objective of the meta-analysis was to determine the most efficacious drug after cytoreduction for colorectal peritoneal metastasis.

METHODS

he databases searched were PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINHAL (EBSCO), and Google Scholar based on the following concepts: colorectal, peritoneal, cytoreduction, Mitomycin, and Oxaliplatin. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE Pro tool. The analysis was carried out using the log hazard ratio as the outcome measure for survival data. All syntheses used the Random-effects model and were reported for Oxaliplatin-based HIPEC with MMC as the reference.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 3406 patients were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.03 (95 % CI: 0.786-1.349) from ten studies. Six studies reported disease-free survival and the pooled hazard ratio was 0.941 (95 % CI: 0.683-1.297). Both survival estimates had moderate statistical heterogeneity. The evidence was of very low certainty for all the outcomes due to the non-randomized nature of studies, clinical and statistical heterogeneity, serious risk of bias due to uncontrolled measured confounding, selection bias, and unequal follow-up durations.

CONCLUSION

Our systematic review and meta-analysis found no significant difference in survival outcomes or postoperative morbidity between MMC and Oxaliplatin-based HIPEC.

Survival outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in selected patients with stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma - A Canadian case series

INTRODUCTION

Despite advances in systemic therapy, metastatic gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. As peritoneal disease is common, several studies looked at the potential benefits of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in this context, with encouraging results. However, no Canadian data currently exists on the subject.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study aims to report characteristics and outcomes of Canadian patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) for gastric cancer associated with peritoneal disease or positive peritoneal cytology. This multicenter retrospective study included patients 18 years or older with gastric cancer associated with isolated peritoneal involvement who underwent CRS-HIPEC in five tertiary centers from 2016 to 2022.

RESULTS

CRS-HIPEC was performed on 20 patients aged 34-69 years old, most of whom presented with poorly differentiated (90 %) adenocarcinoma, with synchronous peritoneal disease (95 %). Median PCI was 3 (0-13). The associated 90-day morbidity rate, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III and above complications, was 10 %. At a mean follow-up of 23.3 months (range 4-48), 25 % of patients remained disease-free, with an estimated median overall survival of 24.2 months.

CONCLUSION

CRS-HIPEC for gastric cancer can achieve longer term survival in highly selected patients with low-burden peritoneal disease or positive cytology. Ongoing randomized trials will further clarify patients' selection criteria and benefits of this approach.

Colon and rectal peritoneal carcinomatosis: are we mixing apples with oranges? A propensity score-matched analysis

Rectal cancer is universally considered a different disease entity as compared to colon cancer, except when dealing with colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), in which the two cancers are deemed as the same one. The present study aims to investigate the influence of primary tumor location (colon vs. rectum) on oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases. Data from three referral centers undergoing CRS plus HIPEC for PC of colorectal origin were prospectively collected. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) according to primary tumor location (colic vs. rectal). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazard model first on the total number of patients. Then, a propensity score matching using the nearest-neighbour method with a 1:1 ratio was performed. The study included 167 patients: 126 colic and 41 rectal PC. After propensity score matching, rectal primary tumor location was independently predictive of a lower DFS (HR 1.91; 95%CI 1.06-3.45; p = 0.031) but not of a lower OS (HR 1.12; 95%CI 0.57-2.21; p = 0.73). Post-matching 3-year DFS rates were 49.2% (95%CI 34,3-70,5%) and 19.4% (95%CI 9,4-40,2%) for colic and rectal PC, respectively. The present study shows a significantly worse DFS for rectal cancer PC undergoing CRS and HIPEC compared to colon cancer PC, suggesting a possible need for dedicated pathways for rectal PC patients and posing a question for rectal PC to be considered as a unique disease entity.

Overview: Challenges of Treating Peritoneal Surface Malignancies

Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) includes an expansive disease spectrum, ranging from low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm to metastatic processes from invasive adenocarcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract. Management of PSM faces numerous challenges, from diagnosis to delivery of care, both from a treatment and navigational standpoint. This article outlines the various hurdles faced at different branch points and current management recommendations.

INDEPSO-ISPSM Consensus on Peritoneal Malignancies: Management of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases

PURPOSE

This manuscript reports the results of the Indian Network for Development of Peritoneal Surface Oncology and Indian Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (INDEPSO-ISPSM) consensus that aimed to provide recommendations for some important aspects management of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) and address some issues unique to India.

METHODS

The modified Delphi technique was used with two rounds of voting. There were 29 questions on nine main topics-the role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS), patient selection for CRS, preoperative workup, role of systemic chemotherapy (SC), CPM with other visceral metastases, molecular profile, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and other modalities of intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC), prophylactic/preventive strategies, and surveillances after CRS. A consensus was achieved if anyone option received >70 votes (strong consensus >90%).

RESULTS

Forty-eight surgical (n = 41) and gastrointestinal (n = 7) oncologists were invited; 44 agreed to participate. The response rate was 95.4% (42/44) in round 1 and 93.1% (41/44) in round 2. Overall, a consensus was achieved on 23/29 (79.3%) questions (strong consensus on 6/29 [20.6%]). The panel strongly recommended considering surgery for limited CPM with limited liver metastases (92.5%), not altering the surgical approach in patients with KRAS mutations (91.67%), and limiting the use of IPC for unresectable CPM outside clinical trials (95%). Adjuvant SC was recommended for all patients undergoing CRS (89.47%). CRS is a therapeutic option for selected patients with CPM including those with metachronous CPM (79.49) and signet ring cell cancers (76.92%). HIPEC was recommended outside clinical trials only for patients with peritoneal cancer index 11-15(80%).

CONCLUSION

The panel recommended CRS for most indications but was very selective in recommending HIPEC and IPC outside clinical trials. These recommendations should be a useful resource in clinical decision making for clinicians treating CPM in India and regions with a similar sociodemographic background.

Review of 2022 PSOGI/RENAPE Consensus on HIPEC

The 2022 PSOGI (Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International) and RENAPE (French Network for Rare Peritoneal Malignancies) consensus on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) was a comprehensive effort aimed at standardizing treatment protocols for various peritoneal malignancies. This initiative is critical due to the wide range of technical variations in HIPEC procedures and the resulting need for standardization to ensure consistent and effective patient care and meaningful audit of multicenter data.

Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is a widely acknowledged treatment approach for peritoneal metastasis, showing favorable prognosis and long-term survival. Intraoperative scoring systems quantify tumoral burden before CRS and may predict complete cytoreduction (CC). This study reviews the intraoperative scoring systems for predicting CC and optimal cytoreduction (OC) and evaluates the predictive performance of the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) and Predictive Index Value (PIV).

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed to compare the absolute predictive performances of PCI and PIV.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies (5834 patients) focusing on gynecological (n = 34; 89.5%), gastrointestinal (n = 2; 5.3%) malignancies, and on tumors of various origins (n = 2; 5.3%) were identified. Seventy-seven models assessing the predictive performance of scoring systems (54 for CC and 23 for OC) were identified with PCI (n = 39/77) and PIV (n = 16/77) being the most common. Twenty models (26.0%) reinterpreted previous scoring systems of which ten (13%) used a modified version of PIV (reclassification). Meta-analyses of models predicting CC based on PCI (n = 21) and PIV (n = 8) provided an AUC estimate of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.86; Q = 119.6, p = 0.0001; I2 = 74.1%) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.68-0.81; Q = 7.2, p = 0.41; I2 = 11.0%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Peritoneal Cancer Index models demonstrate an excellent estimate of CC, while PIV shows an acceptable performance. There is a need for high-quality studies to address management differences, establish standardized cutoff values, and focus on non-gynecological malignancies.

Tata Memorial Centre Evidence Based Management of Colorectal cancer

This review article examines the evidence-based management of colorectal cancers, focusing on topics characterized by ongoing debates and evolving evidence. To contribute to the scientific discourse, we intentionally exclude subjects with established guidelines, concentrating instead on areas where the current understanding is dynamic. Our analysis encompasses a thorough exploration of critical themes, including the evidence surrounding complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy in colon cancers. Additionally, we delve into the evolving landscape of perioperative chemotherapy in both colon and rectal cancers, considering its nuanced role in the context of contemporary treatment strategies. Advancements in surgical techniques are a pivotal aspect of our discussion, with an emphasis on the utilization of minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery in both colon and rectal cancers, including advanced rectal cases. Moving beyond conventional radical procedures, we scrutinize the feasibility and implications of endoscopic resections for small tumors, explore the paradigm of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers, and assess the utility of total neoadjuvant therapy in the current treatment landscape. Our final segment reviews pivotal trials that have significantly influenced the management of colorectal liver and peritoneal metastasis.