Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A single‐center, real‐life experience

The 2022 PSOGI International Consensus on HIPEC Regimens for Peritoneal Malignancies: HIPEC Technologies

This manuscript reports the results of an international consensus on technologies of hyperthermic intraperitoneal perioperative chemotherapy (HIPEC) performed with the following goals: To provide recommendations for the technological parameters to perform HIPEC. To identify the role of heat and its application forms in treating peritoneal metastases. To provide recommendations regarding the correct dosimetry of intraperitoneal chemotherapy drugs and their carrier solutions. To identify for each intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimen the best dosimetry and fractionation. To identify areas of future research pertaining to HIPEC technology and regimens. This consensus was performed by the Delphi technique and comprised two rounds of voting. In total, 96 of 102 eligible panelists replied to both Delphi rounds (94.1%) with a consensus of 39/51 questions on HIPEC technical aspects. Among the recommendations that met with the strongest consensus were those concerning the dose of HIPEC drug established in mg/m2, a target temperature of at least 42°C, and the use of at least three temperature probes to pursue hyperthermia. Ninety minutes as the ideal HIPEC duration seemed to make consensus. These results should be considered when designing new clinical trials in patients with peritoneal surface malignancies.

Expanding the Use of HIPEC in Ovarian Cancer at Time of Interval Debulking Surgery to FIGO Stage IV and After 6 Cycles of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Prospective Analysis on Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Randomized data on patients with FIGO stage III ovarian cancer receiving ≤ 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) showed that hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after interval debulking surgery (IDS) improved patient's survival. We assessed the perioperative outcomes and PFS of FIGO stage IV and/or patients receiving up to 6 cycles of NACT undergoing IDS+HIPEC.

METHODS

Prospectively collected cases from January 1, 2019 to July 31, 2022 were included. Patients underwent HIPEC if: age ≥ 18 years but < 75 years, body mass index ≤ 35 kg/m2, ASA score ≤ 2, FIGO stage III/IV epithelial disease treated with up to 6 cycles of NACT, and residual disease < 2.5 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 205 patients were included. No difference was found in baseline characteristics between FIGO Stage III and IV patients, whereas rate of stable disease after NACT (p = 0.004), mean surgical complexity score at IDS (p = 0.001), and bowel resection rate (p = 0.046) were higher in patients undergoing delayed IDS. A lower rate of patients with at least one G3-G5 postoperative complications was observed in FIGO stage IV versus FIGO stage III disease (5.3% vs. 14.0%; p = 0.052). This difference was confirmed at multivariable analysis (odds ratio [OR] 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.80; p = 0.02), whereas age, SCS, bowel resection, and number of cycles did not affect postoperative complications. No difference in PFS was identified neither between FIGO stage III and IV patients (p = 0.44), nor between 3 and 4 versus > 4 cycles of NACT (p = 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Because of the absence of additional complications and positive survival outcomes, HIPEC administration can be considered in selected FIGO stage IV and patients receiving > 4 cycles of NACT.

Current and future trials about HIPEC in ovarian cancer

Due to the typical peritoneal spread of the disease, together with cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy, the role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is gainig more interest in advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) treatment. Indeed, the addition of hyperthemia seems to enhance the cytotoxic effect of chemotherapy directly delivered on peritoneal surface. So far, data on HIPEC administration during the primary debulking surgery (PDS) have been controversial. Indeed, despite flaws and biases, a survival advantage in a subgroup analysis of a prospective randomized trial of PDS+HIPEC treated patients was not demonstrated, whilst positive results are coming from a large retrospective cohort of patients treated with HIPEC after upfront surgery. In this setting, larger prospective data from an ongoing trial are expected by 2026. Contrariously, the addition of HIPEC with cisplatin 100mg/m2 at the time of interval debulking surgery (IDS) has shown to prolong both progression-free and overall survival by prospective randomized data, despite few controversies on the methodology and the results of this trial arose among the experts. So far, available high quality data on HIPEC treatment after surgery for disease recurrence failed to demonstrate a survival benefit in this group of patients, however few trials are ongoing and results are awaited. With this article, we aim to discuss the main findings of available evidence and the objectives of ongoing trials on the addition of HIPEC to various timing of cytoreductive surgery in AOC, also in view of the development of precision medicine and targeted therapies in AOC treatment.

Is routine admission to a critical care setting following hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer necessary?

INTRODUCTION

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is increasingly being used in patients with stage III ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS). It is uncertain whether routine postoperative admission to a critical care setting after CRS-HIPEC is necessary. This study aims to estimate the incidence of patients requiring critical care, and to create a prediction model to identify patients who may forego admission to a critical care setting.

METHODS

We analyzed 154 patients with primary ovarian cancer undergoing interval CRS-HIPEC at two Dutch centers between 2007 and 2021. Patients were routinely admitted to a critical care setting for 12-24 h. Patients that received critical support as defined by pre-specified definitions were retrospectively identified. Logistic regression analysis with backward selection was used to predict the need for critical care and the model was validated using bootstrapping.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight percent of patients received postoperative critical care, consisting mainly of hemodynamic interventions. Independent predictors of critical care were blood loss, norepinephrine dose during surgery, and age (bootstrapped AUC = 0.76). Using a probability cut-off of 20%, one-third of patients are defined as low-risk for requiring critical care, with a negative predictive value of 0.88.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients,primarily undergoing low to intermediate complexity surgeries, did not receive critical care interventions after CRS-HIPEC. Selective admission to a critical care setting may be warranted and its feasibility and safety needs to be evaluated prospectively. Our prediction model can help identify patients in whom admission to a critical care setting may be omitted. Hospital costs and burden on critical care units will benefit from patient selection.

Complications of HIPEC for ovarian cancer surgery: evaluation over two time periods

OBJECTIVE

Cytoreductive surgery in conjunction with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is being explored in the upfront, interval, and recurrent setting in patients with ovarian cancer. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the rate of complications associated with HIPEC in epithelial ovarian cancer surgery over two time periods.

METHODS

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022328928). A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Ovid/Medline, Ovid/Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2004 to April 2022. We included studies reporting on patients with advanced primary or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC. We evaluated two different time periods: 2004-2013 and 2014-2022. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to produce an overall summary. Subgroup analyses were planned according to recruited period for each specific complication type. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 4928 patients were included from 69 studies for this systematic review; 19 published from 2004-2013, and 50 published from 2014-2022. No significant differences were found between the two time periods in terms of blood transfusions (33% vs 51%; p=0.46; I2=95%) overall gastrointestinal complications (15% vs 21%; p=0.36; I2=98%), infectious diseases (16% vs 13%; p=0.62; I2=93%), overall respiratory complications (12% vs 12%; p=0.88; I2=91%), overall urinary complications (6% vs 12%; p=0.06; I2=94%), or thromboembolic events (5% vs 3%; p=0.25; I2=63%). Also, no differences were found in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (89% vs 28%; p=0.06; I2=99%), reoperations (8% vs 7%; p=0.50; I2=37%), or deaths (3% vs 3%; p=0.77; I2=57%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review showed that overall complications have not changed over time for patients undergoing HIPEC in the setting of primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. There was no decrease in the rates of ICU admissions, reoperations, or deaths.

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

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

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

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

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

Mininvasive Cytoreduction Surgery plus HIPEC for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background and objectives: The Gold-Standard treatment for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer remains cytoreductive surgery followed by systemic chemotherapy. Surgery can be performed either by an open or minimally invasive approach (MIS), although the former remains the most widely used approach. Recently, Van Driel et al. proved that adding 100 mg/m2 of Cisplatin in Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) at Interval Debulking Surgery (IDS) gives a disease-free survival (DFS) advantage. Similarly, Gueli-Alletti et al. demonstrated how the MIS approach is feasible and safe in IDS. Moreover, Petrillo et al. reported pharmacokinetic profiles with a higher chemotherapy concentration in patients undergoing HIPEC after MIS compared with the open approach. Therefore, the following review investigates the oncological and clinical safety consequences of the association between MIS and HIPEC. Methods: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in April 2022. Studies containing data about oncological and safety outcomes were included. We registered the Review to the PROSPERO site for meta-analysis with protocol number CRD42022329503. Results: Five studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 42 patients were included in the review from three different Gynecological Oncological referral centers. The systematic review highlighted a Recurrence Rate ranging between 0 and 100%, with a 3-year Platinum-Free Survival between 10 and 70%. The most common HIPEC drug was Cisplatin, used at concentrations between 75 and 100 mg/m2 and at an average temperature of 42 °C, for 60 to 90 min. Only 1 Acute Kidney Insufficiency has been reported. Conclusions: The scarcity of clinical trials focusing on a direct comparison between MIS and the open approach followed by HIPEC in EOC treatment does not make it possible to identify an oncological advantage between these two techniques. However, the safety profiles shown are highly reassuring.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Pathway of Advanced Ovarian Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases

Over two thirds of ovarian cancer patients present with advanced stage disease at the time of diagnosis. In this scenario, standard treatment includes a combination of cytoreductive surgery and carboplatinum-paclitaxel-based chemotherapy. Despite the survival advantage of patients treated with upfront cytoreductive surgery compared to women undergoing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and interval debulking surgery (IDS) due to high tumor load or poor performance status has been demonstrated by multiple studies, this topic is still a matter of debate. As a consequence, selecting the adequate treatment through an appropriate diagnostic pathway represents a crucial step. Aiming to assess the likelihood of leaving no residual disease at the end of surgery, the role of the CT scan as a predictor of cytoreductive outcomes has shown controversial results. Similarly, CA 125 level as an expression of tumor load demonstrated limited applicability. On the contrary, laparoscopic assessment of disease distribution through a validated scoring system was able to identify, with the highest specificity, patients undergoing suboptimal cytoreduction and therefore best suitable for NACT-IDS. Against this background, with this article, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of available evidence on the diagnostic and treatment pathways of advanced ovarian cancer.

Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) and HIPEC for Advanced Ovarian Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: Italian PSM Oncoteam Evidence and Study Purposes

Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common neoplasm in women with a high mortality rate mainly due to a marked propensity for peritoneal spread directly at diagnosis, as well as tumor recurrence after radical surgical treatment. Treatments for peritoneal metastases have to be designed from a patient's perspective and focus on meaningful measures of benefit. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), a strategy combining maximal cytoreductive surgery with regional chemotherapy, has been proposed to treat advanced ovarian cancer. Preliminary results to date have shown promising results, with improved survival outcomes and tumor regression. As knowledge about the disease process increases, practice guidelines will continue to evolve. In this review, we have reported a broad overview of advanced ovarian cancer management, and an update of the current evidence. The future perspectives of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) are discussed conclusively.

Nomogram to predict postoperative complications after cytoreductive surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

Objective

To establish nomograms to predict the risk of postoperative complications following cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC).

Methods

A multicenter retrospective cohort study that included patients with FIGO stage IIIC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent cytoreductive surgery was designed. By using univariate and multivariate analyses, patient preoperative characteristics were used to predict the risk of postoperative complications. Multivariate modeling was used to develop Nomograms.

Results

Overall, 585 AEOC patients were included for analysis (training cohort = 426, extrapolation cohort = 159). According to the findings, the training cohort observed an incidence of postoperative overall and severe complications of 28.87% and 6.10%, respectively. Modified frailty index (mFI) (OR 1.96 and 2.18), FIGO stage (OR 2.31 and 3.22), and Surgical Complexity Score (SCS) (OR 1.16 and 1.23) were the clinical factors that were most substantially associated to the incidence of overall and severe complications, respectively. The resulting nomograms demonstrated great internal discrimination, good consistency, and stable calibration, with C-index of 0.74 and 0.78 for overall and severe complications prediction, respectively. A satisfactory external discrimination was also indicated by the extrapolation cohort, with the C-index for predicting overall and severe complications being 0.92 and 0.91, respectively.

Conclusions

The risk of considerable postoperative morbidity exists after cytoreductive surgery for AEOC. These two nomograms with good discrimination and calibration might be useful to guide clinical decision-making and help doctors assess the probability of postoperative complications for AEOC patients.

Low Expression of RGS2 Promotes Poor Prognosis in High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer

Simple Summary

Recent advances in molecular medicine have indicated G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) as possible therapeutic targets in ovarian cancer. The cellular effects of GPCRs are determined by regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins. Especially RGS2 has currently moved into focus of cancer therapy. Therefore, we retrospectively analyzed RGS2 and its association with the prognosis of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). Here, we provide in situ and in silico analyses regarding the expression patterns and prognostic value of RGS2. In silico we found that RGS2 is barely detectable in tumor cells on the mRNA level in bulk and single-cell data. Applying immunohistochemistry in 519 HGSOC patients, we detected moderate to strong protein expression of RGS2 in situ in approximately half of the cohort, suggesting regulation by post translational modification. Furthermore, low protein expression of RGS2 was associated with an inferior overall- and progression-free survival. These results warrant further research of its role and related new therapeutic implications in HGSOC.

Abstract

RGS2 regulates G-protein signaling by accelerating hydrolysis of GTP and has been identified as a potentially druggable target in carcinomas. Since the prognosis of patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) remains utterly poor, new therapeutic options are urgently needed. Previous in vitro studies have linked RGS2 suppression to chemoresistance in HGSOC, but in situ data are still missing. In this study, we characterized the expression of RGS2 and its relation to prognosis in HGSOC on the protein level by immunohistochemistry in 519 patients treated at Charité, on the mRNA level in 299 cases from TCGA and on the single-cell level in 19 cases from publicly available datasets. We found that RGS2 is barely detectable on the mRNA level in both bulk tissue (median 8.2. normalized mRNA reads) and single-cell data (median 0 normalized counts), but variably present on the protein level (median 34.5% positive tumor cells, moderate/strong expression in approximately 50% of samples). Interestingly, low expression of RGS2 had a negative impact on overall survival (p = 0.037) and progression-free survival (p = 0.058) on the protein level in lower FIGO stages and in the absence of residual tumor burden. A similar trend was detected on the mRNA level. Our results indicated a significant prognostic impact of RGS2 protein suppression in HGSOC. Due to diverging expression patterns of RGS2 on mRNA and protein levels, posttranslational modification of RGS2 is likely. Our findings warrant further research to unravel the functional role of RGS2 in HGSOC, especially in the light of new drug discovery.

Interval debulking surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced-stage ovarian cancer: Single-institution cohort study

To evaluate the additive effects of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval debulking surgery (IDS) in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. From January 2015 to February 2019, 123 patients with stages IIIC-IV ovarian cancer were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by IDS with optimal cytoreduction. Forty-three patients received IDS with HIPEC and 80 patients had IDS without HIPEC. The median follow-up period was 34.4 months. No differences in baseline characteristics in patients were found between the two groups. The IDS with HIPEC group had fewer median cycles of chemotherapy (P = 0.002) than the IDS group. The IDS with HIPEC group had a higher rate of high surgical complexity score (P = 0.032) and higher rate of complete resection (P = 0.041) compared to the IDS group. The times to start adjuvant chemotherapy were longer in the IDS with HIPEC group compared to the IDS group (P &lt; 0.001). Postoperative grade 3 or 4 complications were similar in the two groups (P = 0.237). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that HIPEC with the IDS group had better progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.010), while there was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (P = 0.142). In the multivariate analysis, HIPEC was significantly associated with better PFS (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39 - 0.93). The addition of HIPEC to IDS resulted in longer PFS than IDS without HIPEC not affecting the safety profile. Further research is needed to evaluate the true place of HIPEC in the era of targeted treatments.

Perspectives on Ovarian Cancer 1809 to 2022 and Beyond

Unlike many other malignancies, overall survival for women with epithelial ovarian cancer has improved only modestly over the last half-century. The perspectives presented here detail the views of a gynecologic oncologist looking back and the view of the academic editor looking forward. Surgical beginnings in 1809 are merged with genomics, surgical advances, and precision therapy at present and for the future. Presentations in this special issue focus on factors related to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer: (1) markers for the preoperative assessment of primary and metastatic ovarian tumors, (2) demonstrations of the presence of pelvic fluid in ultrasound studies of ovarian malignancies, (3) the effects of age, menopausal status, and body habitus on ovarian visualization, (4) the ability of OVA1 to detect ovarian cancers when Ca125 was not informative, (5) the detection of tumor-specific changes in cell adhesion molecules by tissue-based staining, (6) presentation of a high discrimination model for ovarian cancer using IOTA Simple Rules and CA125, (7) review of low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary, and (8) a comprehensive case report on ovarian carcinosarcoma.

Modified Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Without Bevacizumab as a First-Line Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer-Two Centers Experiences

Objectives

To evaluate whether the modified intraperitoneal plus intravenous chemotherapy regimen as a first-line therapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in China can be well-tolerated or confer any potential benefit on survival.

Methods

We evaluated the outcomes of women with newly diagnosed advanced-stage III-IV EOC treated with optimal cytoreductive surgery (&lt;1 cm) and subsequent intraperitoneal plus intravenous chemotherapy or intravenous chemotherapy from January 2005 to December 2017 at two Gynecologic Oncology Centers in China. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression multivariate analysis models were performed to determine the toxicities and survival outcomes.

Results

A total of 463 patients with stage III-IV EOC were enrolled. According to the propensity scores (1:2), 85 patients who received intraperitoneal plus intravenous chemotherapy (group A) were matched to 170 patients who received intravenous chemotherapy (group B). The median follow-up time was 41 months (range 6–155 months). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the median progression-free survival (PFS) (20 vs. 22 months, P = 0.351) or 3-year overall survival (OS) rate (80 vs. 78%, P = 0.749) between the two groups. R0 primary cytoreductive surgery was the only factor related to PFS (P = 0.028) and OS (P = 0.005) by Cox regression analysis. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events did not significantly differ between the two groups.

Conclusion

The efficacy of intraperitoneal chemotherapy mainly comes from the intraperitoneal drug dose intensity and cumulative dose. High-efficiency and low-toxicity intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimens still need to be found and validated.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after primary debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Is BRCA mutational status making the difference?

INTRODUCTION

The role of a molecular pattern predictive of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) efficacy in advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) patients has been poorly investigated. We aimed to assess the effect of HIPEC after primary debulking surgery (PDS) in AOC according to patient's Breast Cancer Gene (BRCA) mutational status.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single center, case-control study. Data on AOC patients receiving HIPEC at the end of PDS as previously enrolled in a phase II monocentric trial (HIPEC group), were retrieved and matched for clinical and surgical characteristics with a group of cases who underwent PDS without receiving HIPEC between 01/2010 and 01/2015 (No HIPEC group). Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage ≥IIIB disease, aged between 18 and 70 years, with a laparoscopic Predictive Index value (PIV) ≤8 and residual disease ≤2.5 mm were included.

RESULTS

70 patients were included. With the except of age (p = 0.012), the populations were balanced for the main characteristics. At a median follow-up of 48 months, no differences in Progression Free Survival (PFS) (p = 0.968) and Overall Survival (OS) (p = 0.789) were recorded. Survival analysis according to HIPEC administration and BRCA mutational status showed an improved PFS (p = 0.011) and OS (p = 0.003) in BRCA mutated compared to wild-type patients when HIPEC was not administered, whilst they were superimposable in case of HIPEC administration (p = 0.857 vs p = 0.372; respectively). No differences in terms of neither intra-operative (p = 1.0) nor early post-operative complications (p = 0.920) were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that HIPEC in AOC may be a promising treatment in BRCA wild-type patients, as it seems to balance their decreased chemosensitivity compared to mutation carriers.

Anesthesia and Cancer, Friend or Foe? A Narrative Review

Cancer remains the leading cause of death worldwide with close to 10 million deaths reported annually. Due to growth of the advanced age cohort in our population, it is predicted that the number of new cancer cases diagnosed between now until 2035 is to reach potentially 24 million individuals, a staggering increase in a relatively short time period. For many solid tumors, surgical resection along with chemotherapy is the best available approach to a potential cure which leads to almost 80% of cancer patients undergoing at least one surgical procedure during the course of their disease. During surgical intervention, the exposure to general anesthesia can be lengthy, complex and often involves various modalities resulting in an important question as to the role, if any, anesthesia may play in primary recurrence or metastatic conversion. Many components of the stress and inflammatory responses exhibited in the perioperative period can contribute to cancer growth and invasion. The agents used to induce and maintain general anesthesia have variable interactions with the immune and neuroendocrine systems and can influence the stress response during surgery. Thus, debating the best type of anesthesia that would help to attenuate sympathetic and/or pro-inflammatory responses while modulating cytokine release and transcription factors/oncogenes remains at the forefront. This may affect inducible cancer cell survival and migratory abilities not only intra-operatively, but also during the immediate post-operative phase of recovery. The ultimate question becomes how and whether the choice of anesthesia may influence the outcomes of cancer surgery with two major approaches being considered, i.e., regional and general anesthesia as well as the various hypnotics, analgesics and sympatholytics commonly used. In this review, we will address the latest information as to the role that anesthesia may play during cancer surgery with specific focus on primary recurrence and metastasis.

Effect of HIPEC on Peritoneal Recurrence in Peritoneal Metastasis Treated With Cytoreductive Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) is a late-stage manifestation of intra-abdominal malignancies. The current standard of care indicates that cure can only be achieved with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) which is often indicated with concurrent adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). However, the utility of HIPEC within subsets of PM is not fully understood. We seek to compare the effectiveness of HIPEC in improving peritoneal recurrence rates in PM of different origins.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of trials on the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, last searched in August 2021. Biases were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials as well as the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) framework.

RESULTS

7 gastric PM studies, 3 ovarian PM studies, and 3 colorectal PM studies were included. Recurrence-free survival was improved in the HIPEC + CRS cohort in 5 gastric trials but only 1 ovarian trial and none of colorectal origin.

DISCUSSION

Our findings indicate decent effectiveness of HIPEC in gastric PM, but limited utility in ovarian and colorectal PM. Limitations in the current literature are attributed to the paucity of data available, a lack of homogeneity and consideration of novel and personalised treatment regimens. We implore for further studies to be conducted with a focus on patient selection and stratification, and suggest a reframing of approach towards modern molecular and targeted therapeutic options in future studies of HIPEC.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#registryofsystematicreviewsmeta-analyses/registryofsystematicreviewsmeta-analysesdetails/60c1ffff0c1b78001e8efbe3/, identifier reviewregistry1166.

Modified frailty index predicts postoperative complications in women with gynecologic cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE(S)

To evaluate the impact of frailty on postoperative complications following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in women with advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancer.

METHODS

An IRB-approved single-institution prospective registry was queried for women who underwent CRS with HIPEC for advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancer from 1/1/2014-12/31/2020. Frailty was defined as a modified Frailty Index (mFI) score of ≥2. Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of mFI upon the rate of moderate or higher (≥ grade 2) Accordion postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of 141 women, 81.6% (n = 115) were non-frail with mFI of 0-1 and 18.4% (n = 26) were frail with mFI ≥2. The incidence of ≥ grade 2 complications was 21.2% (n = 14) for mFI = 0, 26.5% (n = 13) for mFI = 1, 64.7% (n = 11) for mFI = 2 and 100.0% (n = 9) for patients with mFI ≥3. The incidence of re-operation (1.7% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.044), ICU admission (13.2% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.018), acute kidney injury (6.3% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.001), and respiratory failure (0.9% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001) were significantly lower amongst non-frail vs. frail women. On multivariable analysis, mFI ≥2 was associated with significantly increased ≥ grade 2 complications versus mFI of 0-1 (OR 9.4, 95% CI 3.3, 26.4, p < 0.001). Age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00, 1.09, p = 0.07), surgical indication (recurrent vs. primary) (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.30, 1.7, p = 0.44) and Surgical Complexity Score of Intermediate or High vs. Low (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.67, 3.5, p = 0.31) were not associated with ≥grade 2 complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty, defined by the modified frailty index, is predictive of ≥grade 2 postoperative complications following CRS with HIPEC in women with gynecologic cancer. Frailty screening before CRS with HIPEC may assist patient selection and improve postoperative outcomes.

Complications of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: An evaluation of 100 cases

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the perioperative outcomes and complications of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis who underwent cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 100 patients operated on between 2016 and 2020. Patients' characteristics, including age, comorbidities, chemotherapy history, treatment failures, cancer type, histology, platinum sensitivity, and perioperative complications, were documented. Perioperative complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

Median age was 58 years and median follow-up time was 16 months. Eighty-six (86%) patients had ovarian cancer; 11 (11%) experienced grade III-IV complications, and the only relevant factor was the presence of multiple metastasis (P = 0.031). Seven patients (7%) had surgical-site infection; in multivariant analyses, only ostomy formation was found as an independent risk factor for surgical-site infection (odds ratio [OR] 14.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-143.52; P = 0.024). Fifteen (15%) patients experienced elevated serum creatinine after surgery and the median time to creatinine elevation was 5 days postoperatively (range 3-15 days). In multivariant analyses, only age of of 58 years or more was found as a significant factor for the elevation of serum creatinine (OR 6.96; 95% CI 1.42-32.81; P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that the presence of multiple metastases increased the risk of grade III-IV complications and age of 58 years or more was the leading risk factor for renal complications. However, we could not find a relation between postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes. HIPEC seems to be a safe approach in experienced hands.

The addition of sodium thiosulphate to hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with cisplatin in ovarian cancer

•

Cisplatin chemotherapy is highly nephrotoxic and is a dose limiting side effect.

•

The OVIHIPEC-1 trial employed sodium thiosulphate (ST) as a renal protectant.

•

We analyse the implementation of HIPEC for EOC in a peritoneal malignancy centre.

•

One acute kidney injury (AKI) event was noted when ST was not used with HIPEC.

•

No AKI was observed when sodium thiosulphate was used with cisplatin at 100 mg/m^2.

Cisplatin based hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been shown to prolong recurrence free and overall survival of women with ovarian cancer who have responded to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of cytoreductive surgery with or without the addition of HIPEC on renal function.

Method

This is a retrospective case-controlled study at a tertiary teaching hospital in Dublin, Ireland. All patients who had interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC from October 2017 to October 2020 were included. A cohort of patients who had interval CRS without HIPEC were included as a control. Sodium thiosulphate (ST) was added to the HIPEC protocol in 2019. In order to assess the impact of ST as a renal protectant, renal function and post-operative outcomes were compared between the groups.

Results

Sixty patients who had interval CRS were included, thirty of whom received cisplatin-based HIPEC. Seven received cisplatin 50 mg/m² without the addition of ST. Twenty three patients received cisplatin 100 mg/m² and ST. There were no statistically differences in age, body mass index BMI, American society of anaesthesia score, estimated blood loss or peritoneal cancer index between the cohorts (p > 0.05). The only episode of acute kidney injury (AKI) was within the HIPEC cohort, after cisplatin 50 mg/m² (without ST) and this was sustained at three months. In contrast, no patients within the CRS cohort or cisplatin 100 mg/m² that received the addition of ST, sustained a renal injury and all had a creatinine within the normal range at three days post operatively.

Conclusion

The renal toxicity associated with cisplatin HIPEC and major abdominal surgery can be minimised with careful preoperative optimisation, intra operative fluid management and attention to renal function. The addition of sodium thiosulphate is a safe and effective method to minimise toxicity and should be added to any cisplatin HIPEC protocol.

Perioperative outcomes of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in elderly women with epithelial ovarian cancer: analysis of a prospective registry

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative outcomes in elderly versus non-elderly women with advanced or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHODS

A single-institution prospective registry was analyzed for women with ovarian cancer who underwent surgery with HIPEC from January 2014 to December 2020. Elderly age was defined as ≥65 years at surgery. Complications were defined according to the Accordion scale. Univariate and multivariable analysis was used to compare progression-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 127 women who underwent surgery with HIPEC, 33.1% (n=42) were ≥65 and 17.3% (n=22) were ≥70 years old. The median age for non-elderly and elderly patients were 55.7±8.3 versus 72.0±5.4 years, respectively (p<0.001). The majority of non-elderly versus elderly patients underwent HIPEC at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (52.9% vs 73.8%, p=0.024). There were no differences in moderate (15.3% vs 26.2%) or severe postoperative complications (10.6% vs 11.9%, p=0.08), acute kidney injury (7.1% vs 16.7%, p=0.12), and length of stay (5.0 vs 5.0 days, p=0.56) for non-elderly versus elderly patients. With a median follow-up of 20 months (95% CI 9.1 to 32.7 months), there was no difference in progression-free survival (18.8 vs 15.7 months, p=0.75) or overall survival (61.6 months vs not estimable, p=0.72) for non-elderly versus elderly patients. Comparing patients 65-69 versus ≥70 years, progression-free survival (33.0 vs 12.5 months, p=0.002) was significantly improved in patients aged 65-69, without difference in overall survival (not estimable vs 36.0 months, p=0.91). On multivariable analysis, age ≥65 did not impact progression-free survival (p=0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective registry of women with ovarian cancer, perioperative morbidity is not increased for non-elderly versus elderly patients following surgery with HIPEC. While age should not exclude patients from surgery with HIPEC, additional research is needed regarding oncologic benefits in elderly women.

Role of surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is one of the deadliest gynaecological malignancies and tends to be diagnosed at an advanced stage. Similar to many malignancies, surgery plays a critical role in many aspects of ovarian cancer management. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) involves the induction of hyperthermia and delivery of intraperitoneal chemotherapy directly into the peritoneal cavity. Combined with cytoreductive surgery, HIPEC is an emerging treatment modality for ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer survival outcomes can be improved by treatment with surgery and HIPEC in selected patients. Thus, this study aimed to review the current role of surgery and HIPEC in epithelial ovarian cancer. Evidence from the monumental and recent literature will be introduced.

•

Surgery plays a critical role in many aspects of ovarian cancer management.

•

Combined with cytoreductive surgery, HIPEC is an emerging modality for ovarian cancer.

•

Improvement of survival outcomes is expected by applying individualised surgery and HIPEC for each ovarian cancer patient.

Can We Decrease Epicardial and Pericardial Fat in Patients With Diabetes?

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic and complex metabolic disorder and also an important cause of cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). Patients with type 2 DM (T2DM) and obesity show a greater propensity for visceral fat deposition (and excessive fat deposits elsewhere) and the link between adiposity and CVD risk is greater for visceral than for subcutaneous (SC) adipose tissue (AT). There is growing evidence that epicardial AT (EAT) and pericardial AT (PAT) play a role in the development of DM-related atherosclerosis, atrial fibrillation (AF), myocardial dysfunction, and heart failure (HF). In this review, we will highlight the importance of PAT and EAT in patients with DM. We also consider therapeutic interventions that could have a beneficial effect in terms of reducing the amount of AT and thus CV risk. EAT is biologically active and a likely determinant of CV morbidity and mortality in patients with DM, given its anatomical characteristics and proinflammatory secretory pattern. Consequently, modification of EAT/PAT may become a therapeutic target to reduce the CV burden. In patients with DM, a low calorie diet, exercise, antidiabetics and statins may change the quantity of EAT, PAT or both, alter the secretory pattern of EAT, improve the metabolic profile, and reduce inflammation. However, well-designed studies are needed to clearly define CV benefits and a therapeutic approach to EAT/PAT in patients with DM.