Survival advantage of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced gastric cancer: experience from a Western tertiary referral center

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Comparative Analysis of Postoperative Complications after Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in Gastric Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) frequently show peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). PC reduces life expectancy and quality of life. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been shown to improve overall survival. Nevertheless, it has been reported that CRS and HIPEC are accompanied by an increase in postoperative complications. The purpose of this study was to investigate the complications associated with CRS and HIPEC and overall and disease-free survival.

METHODS

Patients with AGC and PC, who received complete CRS and HIPEC, were included in the HIPEC group (n = 15). Patients with AGC but without PC, who received resection of the primary tumor alone, constituted the control group (n = 43).

RESULTS

Patients enrolled in the HIPEC group presented with a median PCI of 7. In comparison with the control group, no differences were found in patient characteristics, risk factors, pathological findings, and operative procedures. Twenty-five percentage of the patients in both groups suffered from serious postoperative complications (CDC ≥3a). Surgical and medical complications, rate of reoperation, and mortality did not differ. Also, the recurrence pattern, median survival, and 1- and 2-year survival rates showed no differences.

CONCLUSION

CRS and HIPEC do not lead to an increased postoperative morbidity and mortality in AGC with PC. Albeit the poorer prognosis of patients with PC, survival of both groups was comparable.