Translational and pharmacological principles of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

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.

The 2022 PSOGI International Consensus on HIPEC Regimens for Peritoneal Malignancies: Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We report the results of an international consensus on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) regimens for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) performed with the following goals: To define the indications for HIPEC To identify the most suitable HIPEC regimens for each indication in EOC To identify areas of future research on HIPEC To provide recommendations for some aspects of perioperative care for HIPEC METHODS: The Delphi technique was used with two rounds of voting. There were three categories of questions: evidence-based recommendations [using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system with the patient, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) method], an opinion survey, and research recommendations.

RESULTS

Seventy-three (67.5%) of 108 invited experts responded in round I, and 68 (62.9%) in round II. Consensus was achieved for 34/38 (94.7%) questions. However, a strong positive consensus that would lead to inclusion in routine care was reached for only 6/38 (15.7%) questions. HIPEC in addition to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) received a strong positive recommendation that merits inclusion in routine care. Single-agent cisplatin was the only drug recommended for routine care, and OVHIPEC-1 was the most preferred regimen. The panel recommended performing HIPEC for a minimum of 60 min with a recommended minimum intraabdominal temperature of 41°C. Nephroprotection with sodium thiosulfate should be used for cisplatin HIPEC.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this consensus should guide clinical decisions on indications of HIPEC and the choice and various parameters of HIPEC regimens and could fill current knowledge gaps. These outcomes should be the basis for designing future clinical trials on HIPEC in EOC.

Cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OVHIPEC-1): final survival analysis of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The OVHIPEC-1 trial previously showed that the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery resulted in improved progression-free and overall survival compared with cytoreductive surgery alone at 4·7 years of follow-up in patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer who were ineligible for primary cytoreduction. We report the final survival outcomes after 10 years of follow-up.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, patients with primary epithelial stage III ovarian cancer were recruited at eight HIPEC centres in the Netherlands and Belgium. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18-76 years, had not progressed during at least three cycles of neoadjuvant carboplatin plus paclitaxel, had a WHO performance status score of 0-2, normal blood counts, and adequate renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo interval cytoreductive surgery without HIPEC (surgery group) or with HIPEC (100 mg/m2 cisplatin; surgery-plus-HIPEC group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation with a masked web-based allocation procedure at the time of surgery when residual disease smaller than 10 mm diameter was anticipated, and was stratified by institution, previous suboptimal cytoreductive surgery, and number of abdominal regions involved. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and a secondary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all randomly assigned patients). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00426257, and is closed.

FINDINGS

Between April 1, 2007, and April 30, 2016, 245 patients were enrolled and followed up for a median of 10·1 years (95% CI 8·4-12·9) in the surgery group (n=123) and 10·4 years (95% CI 9·5-13·3) in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (n=122). Recurrence, progression, or death occurred in 114 (93%) patients in the surgery group (median progression-free survival 10·7 months [95% CI 9·6-12·0]) and 109 (89%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (14·3 months [12·0-18·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·48-0·83], stratified log-rank p=0·0008). Death occurred in 108 (88%) patients in the surgery group (median overall survival 33·3 months [95% CI 29·0-39·1]) and 100 (82%) patients in the surgery-plus-HIPEC group (44·9 months [95% CI 38·6-55·1]; HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·92], stratified log-rank p=0·011).

INTERPRETATION

These updated survival results confirm the long-term survival benefit of HIPEC in patients with primary stage III epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery.

FUNDING

Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF Kankerbestrijding).

Effects of Hyperthermia and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemoperfusion on the Peritoneal and Tumor Immune Contexture

Hyperthermia combined with intraperitoneal (IP) drug delivery is increasingly used in the treatment of peritoneal metastases (PM). Hyperthermia enhances tumor perfusion and increases drug penetration after IP delivery. The peritoneum is increasingly recognized as an immune-privileged organ with its own distinct immune microenvironment. Here, we review the immune landscape of the healthy peritoneal cavity and immune contexture of peritoneal metastases. Next, we review the potential benefits and unwanted tumor-promoting effects of hyperthermia and the associated heat shock response on the tumor immune microenvironment. We highlight the potential modulating effect of hyperthermia on the biomechanical properties of tumor tissue and the consequences for immune cell infiltration. Data from translational and clinical studies are reviewed. We conclude that (mild) hyperthermia and HIPEC have the potential to enhance antitumor immunity, but detailed further studies are required to distinguish beneficial from tumor-promoting effects.

How Magnetic Composites are Effective Anticancer Therapeutics? A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Chemotherapy is the most prominent route in cancer therapy for prolonging the lifespan of cancer patients. However, its non-target specificity and the resulting off-target cytotoxicities have been reported. Recent in vitro and in vivo studies using magnetic nanocomposites (MNCs) for magnetothermal chemotherapy may potentially improve the therapeutic outcome by increasing the target selectivity. In this review, magnetic hyperthermia therapy and magnetic targeting using drug-loaded MNCs are revisited, focusing on magnetism, the fabrication and structures of magnetic nanoparticles, surface modifications, biocompatible coating, shape, size, and other important physicochemical properties of MNCs, along with the parameters of the hyperthermia therapy and external magnetic field. Due to the limited drug-loading capacity and low biocompatibility, the use of magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) as drug delivery system has lost traction. In contrast, MNCs show higher biocompatibility, multifunctional physicochemical properties, high drug encapsulation, and multi-stages of controlled release for localized synergistic chemo-thermotherapy. Further, combining various forms of magnetic cores and pH-sensitive coating agents can generate a more robust pH, magneto, and thermo-responsive drug delivery system. Thus, MNCs are ideal candidate as smart and remotely guided drug delivery system due to a) their magneto effects and guide-ability by the external magnetic fields, b) on-demand drug release performance, and c) thermo-chemosensitization under an applied alternating magnetic field where the tumor is selectively incinerated without harming surrounding non-tumor tissues. Given the important effects of synthesis methods, surface modifications, and coating of MNCs on their anticancer properties, we reviewed the most recent studies on magnetic hyperthermia, targeted drug delivery systems in cancer therapy, and magnetothermal chemotherapy to provide insights on the current development of MNC-based anticancer nanocarrier.

Is there a role for hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our objective is to provide a history, rationale, and review of the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the treatment of ovarian cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last decade, there has been an increase in the literature regarding HIPEC in the treatment of ovarian cancer. The rationale for HIPEC extends from earlier trials demonstrating improved survival using intraperitoneal chemotherapy. HIPEC provides a one-time opportunity for intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the time of cytoreduction and with the addition of hyperthermia. Cisplatin HIPEC has been demonstrated to have a survival benefit when used in the interval cytoreductive setting. In terms of safety, nephroprotection remains a key concern when administering HIPEC. Sodium thiosulfate provides nephroprotection and should be considered when performing HIPEC. Various institutions have created multidisciplinary protocols for administering HIPEC, which include operating room staff, nursing, anesthesia, pharmacy, and surgical teams.

SUMMARY

HIPEC has a role in the treatment paradigm of ovarian cancer. Currently, HIPEC is approved in the interval cytoreductive surgery setting. Further trials are needed to understand the appropriate timing, chemotherapeutic agents, and protocolization of HIPEC.

Evaluation of external validity of the OVHIPEC-1 trial in a real-world population

OBJECTIVE

The OVHIPEC-1 trial (Phase III randomised clinical trial for stage III ovarian carcinoma randomising between interval cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy) showed improved survival when interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) was combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The authors compared the control arm of the trial with a real-world population treated in the Netherlands during the same period to explore generalizability of the trial results.

METHODS

For this nationwide comparative cohort study, all patients with EOC undergoing interval CRS between 2007 and 2016 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry if they fulfilled the eligibility criteria of OVHIPEC-1 (n = 1376). Patient and treatment characteristics, and overall survival (OS) were compared between trial and real-world populations.

RESULTS

Age, comorbidity, BRCA status, histologic subtype, and residual disease were similar in trial and real-world patients. Trial patients had a better performance status, higher socioeconomic status, and underwent bowel surgery more often. In a real-world setting, patients more often received more than six cycles. The difference in OS between the trial and the real-world populations was not statistically significant (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.09 [95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.37]; P = 0.44).

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in patient characteristics, OS of patients treated in the control arm of OVHIPEC-1 was similar to patients treated outside the trial. The trial population accurately represents real-world patients with stage III EOC undergoing interval CRS in terms of outcome.

de Hingh I, Houwink AP, Stoevelaar HJ, Sonke GS, van Driel WJ. Standardizing HIPEC and perioperative care for patients with ovarian cancer in the Netherlands using a Delphi-based consensus

•

Implementation of HIPEC for ovarian cancer is ongoing, aiming to offer this treatment to all eligible patients in the Netherlands.

•

Standardization reduces unwanted variation in clinical treatment.

•

We intend to standardize patient selection, technical aspects, and perioperative care of CRS and HIPEC.

•

This consensus study comprised a two-phase modified Delphi approach.

•

Consensus was reached on 82% of items.

Objective

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) is standard of care in the Netherlands in patients with stage III epithelial ovarian cancer following interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS). Differences in patient selection, technical aspects, and perioperative management exist between centers performing HIPEC. Standardization aims to reduce unwanted variation in clinical practice. As part of an implementation process, we aimed to standardize perioperative care for patients treated with CRS and HIPEC using a Delphi-based consensus approach.

Methods

We performed a two-phase modified Delphi method involving a multidisciplinary panel of 40 experts who completed a survey on CRS and HIPEC. During a consensus meeting, survey outcomes and available scientific evidence was discussed. Items without consensus (<75% agreement) were adjusted and evaluated in a second survey.

Results

Consensus was reached in the first round on 51% of items. After two rounds, consensus was reached on the majority of items (82%) including patient selection, preoperative workup, technical aspects of CRS and HIPEC, and postoperative care. No consensus was reached on the role of HIPEC in rare ovarian cancer types, preoperative bowel preparation, timing to create bowel anastomoses, and manipulation of the perfusate.

Conclusions

Dutch experts reached consensus on most items regarding interval CRS and HIPEC for ovarian cancer. This consensus study may help to align treatment protocols and to minimize practice variation. Topics without consensus may be put on the research agenda of HIPEC for ovarian cancer.