Cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis

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.

Nephrotoxicity Associated with Cytoreductive Surgery Combined with Cisplatin-Based Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Malignant Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Cisplatin is employed in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs). The main concern regarding intraperitoneal cisplatin administration is nephrotoxicity. Numerous reports in this context are available. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess cisplatin-based HIPEC-related nephrotoxicity (CHRN). Methods: A systematic literature review on CHRN after CRS for the treatment of PSMs was performed. The literature search was carried out using Medline, Cochrane, and Embase. The last day of the search was 23 October 2023. PRISMA guidelines were used. A meta-analysis was then conducted. The main endpoint was the incidence of acute and chronic renal impairment after CHRN. Secondary endpoints included the potential impact of several clinical variables on the primary endpoint and a critical appraisal of the different renal impairment scales employed. Results: Our study included 26 articles with a total sample of 1473 patients. The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was 18.6% (95% CI: 13.6-25%, range of true effects 3-59%). For chronic kidney disease, it was 7% (95% CI: 3-15.3%, range of true effects 1-53%). The variables that statistically influenced these results were the scale used to measure renal insufficiency, the use of nephroprotective agents, and the presence of pre-existing renal disease. Conclusions: The reported incidence of renal impairment following cisplatin-based HIPEC is highly variable. The incidence of renal failure obtained in this meta-analysis should be used as a reference for subsequent reports on this topic. Further prospective studies are warranted to establish optimal and standardized management.

Material density dual-energy CT images: value added in early diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis : Original research

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of material density (MD) images generated from a rapid kilovoltage-switching dual-energy CT (rsDECT) in early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients (60 ± 13 years; 24 women) with PC detected on multiple abdominal DECT scans were included. Four separate DECTs with varying findings of PC from each patient were used for qualitative/quantitative analysis, resulting in a total of 120 DECT scans (n = 30 × 4). Three radiologists independently reviewed DECT images (65 keV alone and 65 keV + MD) for diagnosis of PC (diagnostic confidence, lesion conspicuity, sharpness/delineation and image quality) using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative estimation of contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was done. Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Odds ratio calculation were used to compare between the two protocols. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated using Kappa coefficient analysis. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

65 keV + MD images showed a slightly higher sensitivity (89%[95%CI:84,92]) for PC detection compared with 65 keV images alone without statistical significance (84%[95%CI:78,88], p = 0.11) with the experienced reader showing significant improvement (98%[95%CI:93,100] vs. 90%[95%CI:83,94], p = 0.02). On a per-patient basis, use of MD images allowed earlier diagnosis for PC in an additional 13-23% of patients. On sub-group analysis, earlier diagnosis of PC was particularly beneficial in patients with BMI ≤ 29.9 kg/m2. 65 keV + MD images showed higher diagnostic confidence, lesion conspicuity, and lesion sharpness for the experienced reader (p < 0.001). CNR was higher in MD images (1.7 ± 0.5) than 65 keV images (0.1 ± 0.02, p < 0.001). All readers showed moderate interobserver agreement for determining PC by both protocols (κ = 0.58 and κ = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

MD images allow earlier and improved detection of PC with the degree of benefit varying based on reader experience and patient body habitus.

Efficacy of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) + HIPEC in Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is one of deadliest metastatic patterns of gastric cancer, being associated with a median overall survival (OS) of 4 months. Up to now, palliative systemic chemotherapy (pSC) has been the only recommended treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate a potential survival benefit after CRS + HIPEC compared to pSC.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines in March 2024. Manuscripts reporting patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer treated with CRS + HIPEC were included. A meta-analysis was performed, comparing the survival results between the CRS + HIPEC and pSC groups, and the primary outcome was the comparison in terms of OS. We performed random-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs). We assessed heterogeneity using the Q2 statistic.

RESULTS

Out of the 24 papers included, 1369 patients underwent CRS + HIPEC, with a median OS range of 9.8-28.2 months; and 103 patients underwent pSC, with a median OS range of 4.9-8 months. CRS + HIPEC was associated with significantly increased survival compared to palliative systemic chemotherapy (-1.8954 (95% CI: -2.5761 to -1.2146; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CRS + HIPEC could provide survival advantages in gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis compared to pSC.

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).

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.

Cytoreduction and HIPEC for Gastric Carcinomatosis: Multi-institutional Analysis of Two Phase II Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

There are no approved locoregional therapies for peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric adenocarcinoma (GA). Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) represents a potential treatment for advanced GA with isolated peritoneal metastasis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two separate single-institution phase II, single-arm studies evaluating CRS-HIPEC using cisplatin with mitomycin C (NIH: NCT03092518, MDACC: NCT02891447) in patients with GA and confirmed peritoneal metastasis were analyzed. The primary endpoint of each trial was overall survival (OS). Clinical, pathologic, and treatment variables were analyzed for association with outcomes.

RESULTS

Over 4 years, 41 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from GA underwent CRS-HIPEC. All patients had synchronous peritoneal metastasis and received systemic chemotherapy as front-line therapy. A total of 23 patients also received laparoscopic HIPEC prior to open CRS-HIPEC. The majority (63%, n = 26) were male, and median PCI score at CRS-HIPEC was 2. Median OS was 24.9 months from diagnosis and 14.4 months from CRS-HIPEC. Three-year OS was 25% from diagnosis and 22% from CRS-HIPEC. Median RFS was 7.4 months. The rate of 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications was 32%; specifically, the rate of anastomotic leak was 22%. Multivariable analysis identified the number of pathologically positive lymph nodes as an independent predictor of postoperative OS.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with gastric adenocarcinoma and isolated peritoneal metastasis treated with CRS-HIPEC, 3-year OS was 22% from CRS-HIPEC, and complications were common. The number of pathologic lymph node metastases was inversely correlated with overall survival. Further investigation of CRS-HIPEC for GA should include patient selection based on response to systemic chemotherapy or incorporate novel intraperitoneal treatment strategies.

Surgical Options for Peritoneal Surface Metastases from Digestive Malignancies-A Comprehensive Review

The peritoneum is a common site for the dissemination of digestive malignancies, particularly gastric, colorectal, appendix, or pancreatic cancer. Other tumors such as cholangiocarcinomas, digestive neuroendocrine tumors, or gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) may also associate with peritoneal surface metastases (PSM). Peritoneal dissemination is proven to worsen the prognosis of these patients. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS), along with systemic chemotherapy, have been shown to constitute a survival benefit in selected patients with PSM. Furthermore, the association of CRS with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to significantly improve the prognosis of patients with certain types of digestive malignancies associated with PSM. However, the benefit of CRS with HIPEC is still controversial, especially due to the significant morbidity associated with this procedure. According to the results of the PRODIGE 7 trial, CRS for PSM from colorectal cancer (CRC) achieved overall survival (OS) rates higher than 40 months, but the addition of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC failed to improve the long-term outcomes. Furthermore, the PROPHYLOCHIP and COLOPEC trials failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC for preventing peritoneal metastases development in high-risk patients operated for CRC. In this review, we discuss the limitations of these studies and the reasons why these results are not sufficient to refute this technique, until future well-designed trials evaluate the impact of different HIPEC regimens. In contrast, in pseudomyxoma peritonei, CRS plus HIPEC represents the gold standard therapy, which is able to achieve 10-year OS rates ranging between 70 and 80%. For patients with PSM from gastric carcinoma, CRS plus HIPEC achieved median OS rates higher than 40 months after complete cytoreduction in patients with a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) ≤6. However, the data have not yet been validated in randomized clinical trials. In this review, we discuss the controversies regarding the most efficient drugs that should be used for HIPEC and the duration of the procedure. We also discuss the current evidence and controversies related to the benefit of CRS (and HIPEC) in patients with PSM from other digestive malignancies. Although it is a palliative treatment, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) significantly increases OS in patients with unresectable PSM from gastric cancer and represents a promising approach for patients with PSM from other digestive cancers.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer based on laboratory tests is safe: a single Chinese center analysis

Purpose

About 15%—40% of gastric cancer patients have peritoneal metastasis, which leads to poor prognosis. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is considered to be an effective treatment for these patients. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of HIPEC in patients with gastric cancer diagnosed from laboratory tests.

Methods

The clinical and pathological data of 63 patients with gastric cancer who underwent HIPEC in 2017–2021 were prospectively recorded. Fifty-five patients underwent cytoreductive surgery + HIPEC, and eight patients received HIPEC alone. The factors associated with HIPEC safety and efficacy were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

Results

The average patient age was 54.84 years and 68.3% of patients were male. Moreover, 79.4% of patients had a peritoneal carcinoma index (PCI) score of ≤ 7 and 61.9% had a completeness of cytoreduction score of 0. Because of peritoneal metastasis, 29 patients (46.03%) were classified as stage IV. Laboratory tests showed no differences in pre-HIPEC blood test results compared to post-HIPEC results after removing the effects of surgery. HIPEC treatment did not cause obvious liver or kidney damage. Serum calcium levels decreased significantly after HIPEC (P = 0.0018). The Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score correlated with the patient’s physical function and improved after HIPEC (P = 0.0045). In coagulation tests, FDP (P < 0.0001) and D-dimer (P < 0.0001) levels increased significantly and CA242 (P = 0.0159), CA724 (P < 0.0001), and CEA (P < 0.0014) levels decreased significantly after HIPEC. Completeness of cytoreduction score was an independent prognostic factor. HIPEC did not show a survival benefit in patients with gastric cancer (P = 0.5505).

Conclusion

HIPEC is a safe treatment for patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis based on the laboratory tests. However, the efficacy of this treatment on gastric-derived peritoneal metastases requires further confirmation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-022-01795-6.

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.

HIPEC in Peritoneal Metastasis of Gastric Origin: A Systematic Review of Regimens and Techniques

(1) Background: Peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Complete cytoreductive surgery including gastrectomy and complete removal of all peritoneal lesions followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) achieves promising results. There exists an immersive variety of approaches for HIPEC that makes it difficult to weigh different results obtained in the literature. In order to enable standardization and development of HIPEC, we here present a systematic review of different drug regimens and technical approaches. (2) Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched on 26 May 2021 using the mesh terms “intraperitoneal chemotherapy AND gastric cancer”. Under consideration of systematic review guidelines, articles reporting on HIPEC in combination with CRS were selected. Data on duration, drugs, dosage, and other application parameters as well as morbidity and long term survival data were extracted for subsequent statistical analysis, tabulation, and descriptive synthesis. We assessed the risk of bias due to inhomogeneity of the patient cohort and incompleteness of report of HIPEC parameters. (3) Results: Out of 1421 screened publications, 42 publications presenting data from 1325 patients met the criteria. Most of the publications were single institutional retrospective cohort studies. The most common HIPEC regimen is performed after gastrointestinal anastomosis and consists of 50–200 mg/m² cisplatinum and 30–40 mg/m² mytomycin C at 42–43 °C for 60–90 min in a closed abdomen HIPEC system with three tubes. Almost every study reported incompletely on HIPEC parameters. Lower rates of anastomotic leakage were reported in studies that performed HIPEC after gastrointestinal anastomosis. Studies that performed open HIPEC and integrated a two-drug regimen indicated better overall survival rates. (4) Discussion: This is an exhaustive overview of the use of drug regimens and techniques for HIPEC after CRS for gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis. Other indications and application modes of intraperitoneal chemotherapy such as prophylactic or palliative HIPEC apart from CRS were not addressed. (5) Conclusion: Complete report of HIPEC parameters should be included in every publication. A consensus for dose expression either per BSA or as flat dose is desirable for comparison of the drug regimens. Despite numerous variations, we identified the most common regimens and techniques and their advantages and disadvantages according to the data in the literature. More phase I/II studies are needed to identify the best approach for HIPEC. (6) Other: This review was not supported by third parties.

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in the Management of Gastric Cancer: A Narrative Review

Gastric cancer (GC) patients with peritoneal metastasis tend to achieve poor clinical outcomes. Until recently, the treatment options were limited mainly to either palliative chemotherapy or radiation therapy in exceptional cases. Currently, these patients benefit from multimodal treatment, such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Despite good overall results, this treatment modality is still widely debated. The following study is designed to assess the papers about the possible application and utility of HIPEC in GC. A search in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was performed to assess the papers devoted to the role of HIPEC in GC treatment; a literature search was performed until March 21st; and, finally, 50 studies with a total number of 3946 patients were analyzed. According to the most recent data, it seems to be reasonable to limit the duration of HIPEC to the shortest effective time. Moreover, the drugs used in HIPEC need to have equal concentrations and the same solvent. Perioperative chemotherapy needs to be reported in detail and, furthermore, the term "morbidity" should be defined more clearly by the authors.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis—Indian Experience

Introduction Peritoneal metastasis secondary to gastric cancer is associated with poor prognosis. Recent studies have shown that cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may be an efficacious treatment option for an otherwise palliative condition.

Methods A retrospective single institutional study of patents diagnosed with gastric carcinoma and peritoneal metastasis and treated with CRS and HIPEC from February 2015 to December 2019.

Results Sixteen patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis were treated with CRS and HIPEC. Three patients underwent upfront surgery, and five patients underwent interval surgery. The mean peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 3.5, and adequate complete cytoreduction (CC) score of 0/1 was achieved in all patients. All patients received HIPEC with mitomycin C. Major surgical complications were in 12.5% of patients. Grade I surgical site infection was present in one patient. Three patients had prolonged gastrointestinal (GI) recovery. The 30-day mortality was zero. Median follow-up time was 39 months. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.86–17.13). The median overall survival (OS) was 17 months (95% CI 6.36–27.64).

Conclusion Multidisciplinary treatment of perioperative chemotherapy with CRS and HIPEC is a promising treatment option, which may prolong survival in selected patients, and large randomized clinical trials are warranted for it to become standard of care.

Laparoscopic Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in the Treatment of Carcinomatosis of Gastric Adenocarcinoma Origin

The use of heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in conjunction with cytoreductive surgery has been gaining increasing traction in treating gastric adenocarcinoma with metastasis to the peritoneum in recent years. The addition of laparoscopic HIPEC (LS-HIPEC) to these treatment algorithms has increased the flexibility and adaptability of HIPEC integrating into treatment sequencing, allowing for iterative protocols of LS-HIPEC prior to cytoreduction as neoadjuvant treatment, as well as in the palliation of patients with unresectable disease and uncontrolled ascites. As the use of HIPEC in gastric adenocarcinoma continues to be refined, LS-HIPEC algorithms should continue to be considered and utilized both in curative treatment algorithms as well as in patients in the palliative setting. Given that LS-HIPEC remains a relatively nascent treatment modality, we advocate for its use in the setting of a clinical trial when feasible.

Risk Factors for Metachronous Isolated Peritoneal Metastasis after Preoperative Chemotherapy and Potentially Curative Gastric Cancer Resection: Results from the CRITICS Trial

Simple Summary

Around 20% of gastric cancer patients develop peritoneal metastasis after preoperative chemotherapy and curative surgery. Patients with peritoneal metastasis as a single site of metastasis may potentially benefit from prophylactic strategies. In this post-hoc analysis of the international phase III CRITICS trial, we aim to identify factors that can distinguish patients at high risk for developing peritoneal metastasis as a single site. Diffuse or mixed histological subtype, tumors with serosal involvement (ypT4) and advanced lymph node stage (ypN3 or a tumor positive lymph node ratio >20%) were independent risk factors for isolated peritoneal metastasis after preoperative chemotherapy and curative surgery. The combination of these risk factors identifies a subgroup that may benefit from treatment strategies that aim to prevent peritoneal metastasis.

Abstract

Gastric cancer (GC) patients at high risk of developing peritoneal metastasis (PM) as a single site of metastasis after curative treatment may be candidates for adjuvant prophylactic strategies. Here we investigated risk factors for metachronous isolated PM in patients who were treated in the CRITICS trial (NCT00407186). Univariable and multivariable analyses on both metachronous isolated PM and ‘other events’, i.e., (concurrent) distant metastasis, locoregional recurrence or death, were performed using a competing risk model and summarized by cumulative incidences. Isolated PM occurred in 64 of the 606 (11%) included patients. Diffuse or mixed histological subtype, ypT4 tumor stage and LN^high (ypN3 lymph node stage or a lymph node ratio >20%) were independent risk factors for isolated PM in both univariable and multivariable analyses. Likewise, LN^high was an independent risk factor for ‘other events’. Patients with tumors who were positive for all three independent risk factors had the highest two-year cumulative incidence of 43% for isolated PM development. In conclusion, diffuse or mixed histological subtype, ypT4 and LN^high were identified as independent risk factors for isolated PM in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. The combination of these factors may identify a subgroup that may benefit from PM-preventing treatment strategies.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: Multicenter Study of 'Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam-S.I.C.O.'

Background

The development of multimodality treatment, including cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), has led to promising results in selected patients with peritoneal disease of gastric origin. The aim of this study was to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of CRS/HIPEC in the treatment of synchronous peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer.

Methods

The Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam—S.I.C.O. retrospective registry included patients with synchronous peritoneal malignancy from gastric cancer submitted to gastrectomy with CRS and HIPEC between 2005 and 2018 from 11 high-volume, specialized centers.

Results

A total of 91 patients with a median age of 58 years (range 26–75) were enrolled. The median overall survival (OS) time for the whole group of patients was 20.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.8–28.5] and the median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 7.3 months (95% CI 4–10.6). The completeness of cytoreduction score (CCS) of 0 and Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) score of ≤ 6 groups showed a significantly better long-term survival (median OS 40.7 and 44.3 months, respectively) compared with the incomplete resected groups (median OS 10.7 months, p = 0.003) and PCI score of > 6 group (median OS 13.4 months, p = 0.005). A significant difference was observed in the survival rate according to neoadjuvant treatment (untreated patients: 10.7 months, 95% CI 5.1–16.2; treated patients: 35.3 months, 95% CI 2.8–67.8; p = 0.022).

Conclusions

In referral centers, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant treatment significantly improved survival in selected patients. Patients with a PCI score ≤ 6, complete cytoreduction, negative nodal involvements, and negative cytology had encouraging results, showing a clinically meaningful survival.

The Landmark Series: Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for Treatment of Gastric Cancer Metastatic to Peritoneum

Gastric cancer (GC) is a common cancer worldwide, with patients developing isolated peritoneal metastases (PM) in approximately 30% of cases. In patients with PM, prognosis is quite poor, and long-term survival is almost zero. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment in many peritoneal malignancies, including appendiceal and ovarian cancers and in peritoneal mesothelioma. In this educational review, we summarize many of the seminal studies addressing the potential benefit of CRS/HIPEC for patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases (GC/PM).

Review of management and treatment of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer origin

Gastric cancer (GC) is the third cause of cancer-related deaths in the world, with less than 25% survivors at 5 years. These results are largely related to the high incidence of peritoneal metastases (PM) in these patients. Nowadays, the standard treatment for GC with PM is palliative systemic chemotherapy (SCT) with a survival of 6 months. From the 2000s, the combination of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been gaining popularity for different neoplastic diseases that involve the peritoneal surface. The use of CRS and HIPEC has been studied for GC with PM, with promising results in selected patients, obtaining survival rates never seen before. Moreover, HIPEC and other intraperitoneal chemotherapy techniques have been used to prevent peritoneal recurrences in patients diagnosed on locally advanced GC without macroscopic PM (adjuvant or prophylactic HIPEC). Even, intraperitoneal chemotherapy [laparoscopic HIPEC and neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS)] has been used as neoadjuvant treatment to reduce peritoneal disease burden in order to improve the rate of patients in whom complete cytoreduction can be achieved. Finally, patients with high volume peritoneal disease can be treated by palliative intraperitoneal chemotherapy to control the symptoms resulting from malignant ascites, using laparoscopic HIPEC or pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). This review aims to update the management of PM from GC origin in these different clinical scenarios, based on the literature and the experience of the authors.

Intra-operative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer: a narrative review

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC) has long been regarded as the terminal disease, lacking of effective treatments. In recent 40 years, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), and early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), has been recommended as a preferred treatment option for some selected patients with GCPM. Intraperitoneal free cancer cells were recognized as the pathological cause of PM and the primary target for intraperitoneal chemotherapy. There were a lot of evidence demonstrating that HIPEC could effectively eradiate intraperitoneal free cancer cells and prolong overall survival in GCPM. However, there are still no standard HIPEC protocols. This review summarized the current HIPEC regimens used in GCPM from a literature search, trying to conclude the optimal HIPEC in GCPM, and indicate the future direction of HIPEC study. Moreover, the new data on the exploration of HIPEC in GCPM at Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University was shared. In conclusion, there was not enough evidence from publications and our own experience to conclude a recommended HIPEC regimen for GCPM. There is urgent need for standardizing HIPEC protocols worldwide. Accordingly, more international collaborations focusing on pharmacology and HIPEC-related parameters to generate high level evidence are essential.

Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of peritoneal metastasis of gastric origin treated with a hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy procedure in the PERISCOPE I trial

INTRODUCTION

The PERISCOPE I (Treatment of PERItoneal dissemination in Stomach Cancer patients with cytOreductive surgery and hyPErthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy) study was conducted to investigate the safety and feasibility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination. In this study, tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of the patients treated in the PERISCOPE I trial were investigated.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone the full study protocol were selected; that is, preoperative systemic chemotherapy, followed by a surgical procedure consisting of a (sub)total gastrectomy, cytoreductive surgery, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin (460 mg/m² ) and docetaxel (in escalating doses).

RESULTS

Twenty-five PERISCOPE I patients underwent the full study protocol. Most patients had an ypT3-4 tumor (96%) and the diffuse-type histology was predominant (64%). Seven patients (28%) had a microscopically irradical (R1) resection. In all patients, a complete cytoreduction was achieved. Median follow-up was 37 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34-39) months. Disease recurrence was detected in 17 patients (68%). Median disease-free and overall survival were 12 and 15 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this series of gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination who underwent HIPEC surgery, unfavorable tumor characteristics were common. Survival might be encouraging but disease recurrence was frequent. The efficacy of an HIPEC procedure in improving prognosis is currently being investigated in the PERISCOPE II trial.

Perioperative Management of Gastric Cancer Patients Treated With (Sub)Total Gastrectomy, Cytoreductive Surgery, and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): Lessons Learned

BACKGROUND

The PERISCOPE I study was designed to assess the safety and feasibility of (sub)total gastrectomy, cytoreductive surgery (CRS), and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with oxaliplatin and docetaxel for gastric cancer patients who have limited peritoneal dissemination. The current analysis investigated changes in perioperative management together with their impact on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with resectable gastric cancer and limited peritoneal dissemination were administered (sub)total gastrectomy, CRS, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin (460 mg/m²) and docetaxel (escalating scheme: 0, 50, 75 mg/m²). Of the 25 patients who completed the study protocol, 14 were treated in the dose-escalation cohort and 11 were treated in the expansion cohort (to optimize perioperative management).

RESULTS

A significant proportion of the patients in the dose-escalation cohort (n = 7, 50%) had ileus-related complications. In this cohort, enteral nutrition was started immediately after surgery at 20 ml/h, which was increased on day 1 to meet nutritional needs. In the expansion cohort, enteral nutrition was administered at 10 ml/h until day 3, then restricted to 20 ml/h until day 6, supplemented with total parenteral nutrition to meet nutritional needs. Ileus-related complications occurred for two patients (18%) of the expansion cohort. The intensive care unit (ICU) readmission rate decreased from 50 (n = 7) to 9% (n = 1; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a strict nutritional protocol during the PERISCOPE I study was associated with a decrease in postoperative complications. Based on these results, a perioperative care path was described for the gastric cancer HIPEC patients in the PERISCOPE II study.

Peritoneal cancer index (PCI) based patient selecting strategy for complete cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis: A single-center retrospective analysis of 125 patients

OBJECTIVE

The role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) is still controversial, mainly due to the limited survival benefit and uncertain patient selection. This study aims to construct a selecting strategy in GCPM for CRS + HIPEC.

METHODS

From a prospective established database, 125 patients were enrolled. All these patients were pathologically confirmed as GCPM and treated with CRS + HIPEC with or without preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy. The clinical documents and follow-up results were collected and analyzed with the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoint of perioperative serious adverse events (SAEs).

RESULTS

The median OS of 125 GCPM patients treated with CRS + HIPEC was 10.7 months, with 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of 43.8%, 24.7%, 18.6%, and 15.7%, respectively. The multivariate analysis identified completeness of cytoreduction (CC), SAEs, HIPEC drugs, and adjuvant chemotherapy as independent prognostic factors on OS. The median OS was 30.0 (95%CI: 16.8-43.3) months in CC-0 group, significantly better than 7.3 (95%CI: 5.8-8.8) months in CC1-3 group (P < 0.001). The median OS showed no significant difference among CC-1 (8.5, 95%CI: 6.7-10.2, months), CC-2 (5.6, 95%CI: 3.0-8.2, months) and CC-3 (6.5, 95%CI: 5.2-7.7, months) groups (P > 0.05 for all pairwise comparations). The nomogram based on peritoneal metastasis timing, preoperative tumor marker (TM), and peritoneal cancer index (PCI), with AUC of 0.985, showed a good accuracy and consistency between actual observation and prediction of the probability of complete CRS. The cutoffs of PCI were 16 for synchronous GCPM with normal TM, 12 for synchronous GCPM with abnormal TM, 10 for metachronous GCPM with normal TM, and 5 for metachronous GCPM with abnormal TM, setting the probability to achieve complete CRS as 50%.

CONCLUSIONS

Only complete CRS + HIPEC (CC-0) could improve survival for high selected GCPM patients with acceptable safety. An incomplete CRS (CC1-3) should be avoided for GCPM patients. Synchronous GCPM with PCI ≤16 and normal TM, synchronous GCPM with PCI ≤12 and abnormal TM, metachronous GCPM with PCI ≤10 and normal TM, or metachronous GCPM with PCI ≤5 and abnormal TM maybe potential indications for complete CRS + HIPEC treatment.

Factors Prognostic for Peritoneal Metastases from Colorectal Cancer Treated with Surgery

Purpose

To analysis factors prognostic for peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with surgery using data from two sources and investigate the origin and effective treatment of ovarian metastases (OM).

Patients and Methods

Data from CRC patients with PM who had undergone surgery were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (n = 639) and a single Chinese institution (n = 60). Cumulative survival was evaluated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Factors associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) prognosis were assessed using Cox’s proportional hazard regression models.

Results

Median OS values for patients who underwent surgery were 19 and 32 months in the SEER database and Chinese center, respectively. Age was an independent predictor of OS in both datasets. Signet-ring cell cancer and perineural invasion were independent predictors of inferior OS only in the SEER dataset, while completeness of cytoreduction (CC) and peritoneal carcinomatosis index were independent predictors for OS and PFS only in the Chinese center. Median OS was 24 months in CRC patients with PM alone and 36 months in those with both PM and OM (p = 0.181). Further, median PSF in patients with PM alone was 10 months, while that in individuals with both PM and OM was 20 months (p = 0.181).

Conclusion

Surgical treatment of the primary and metastatic sites is effective and safe for CRC patients with PM. CC-0 is recommended for improved prognosis. Moreover, OM should be recognized as a feature of PM, and cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is beneficial for CRC patients with OM.

Long term survival in patients with peritoneal metastasised gastric cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: A multi-institutional cohort from PSOGI

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) of gastric cancer (GC) is relatively common (17%) and is associated with poor survival. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is still controversially discussed, as it has proven an increase in survival in selected patients, but only a small subgroup reached long-term survival. The aim of this study was to collect and analyse a worldwide cohort of patients treated with CRS and HIPEC with long-term survival in order to explore relevant patient characteristics.

METHODS

We conducted a questionnaire, which was distributed to all collaborators of the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI). Inclusion criteria were: histopathologic proven PM of GC, treated with CRS and HIPEC, and overall survival >5 years. Patient, tumour, and therapeutic details were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

From an analysis of 448 patients treated between 1994 and 2014, a total of 28 patients with a mean age of 53.0 years and mean PCI of 3.3 were included. The overall median survival was 11.0 years (min 5.0; max 27.9). The predictors completeness of cytoreduction (CC-0) and PCI<6 were present in 22/28 patients. 12/28 patients developed at a median of 9.6 years tumour recurrence, and was associated with inferior median overall survival compared to patients without recurrence (8.8 years vs. not reached; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival and even cure are possible in patients with PM of GC treated with CRS and HIPEC. Completeness of cytoreduction and low PCI seemed to be crucial. Further studies are needed in order to improve existing selection criteria.

PIPAC versus HIPEC: cisplatin spatial distribution and diffusion in a swine model

Purpose: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel approach for delivering intraperitoneal chemotherapy and offers perspective in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Concept is based on a 12 mmHg capnoperitoneum loaded with drug changed in microdoplets. It was postulated to guarantee a more homogeneous drug distribution and tissular uptake than hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The aim of this study was to compare cisplatin peritoneal distribution and pharmacokinetic between HIPEC and PIPAC procedures in a healthy swine model.Methods: Two groups of eight pigs underwent either HIPEC with cisplatin (70 mg/m²) at 43 °C for 60 min, or PIPAC with cisplatin (7.5 mg/m²) for 30 min. Postoperatively, peritoneal areas were biopsied allowing peritoneal cavity cartography. Tissular and plasmatic cisplatin concentrations were analyzed.Results: Cisplatin distribution was heterogeneous in both the groups with higher concentrations obtained closed to the delivery sites. Median total platinum peritoneal concentration by pig was higher in the HIPEC group than in the PIPAC group (18.0 μg/g versus 4.3 μg/g, p < .001) but the yield was 2.2 times better with PIPAC. Platinum concentrations were higher in the HIPEC group in all stations. At each time-point, cisplatin plasmatic concentrations were higher in the HIPEC group (p < .001) but beneath the toxicity threshold.Conclusions: With doses used in clinical practice, HIPEC guaranteed a higher cisplatin peritoneal uptake than PIPAC in this swine model. Spatial drug distribution was heterogeneous with both technics, with hotspots closed to the drug delivery sites. Nevertheless, considering the dose ratio, IP drug uptake yield was better with PIPAC.

Efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the management of malignant ascites

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to compare the difference of clinical efficacy between conventional intraperitoneal chemotherapy and HIPEC, so as to explore the clinical application value and advantages of HIPEC.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 80 patients with malignant ascites admitted to our hospital from June 2017 to June 2019. The general clinical data and qualitative data of the treatment results of 80 patients with malignant ascites were processed by SPSS19.0 using χ² test, and quantitative data were processed by t test. P < 0.05, statistical data can be considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

1. There was no significant change in vital signs and temperature in the observation group during the treatment, and the difference was not statistically significant. 2. The short-term total effective rate of patients in the observation group was 91.11%, and the short-term total effective rate of the patients in the control group was 40%. 3. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups of patients.

CONCLUSION

Intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy combined with intravenous chemotherapy can significantly control malignant ascites and has small adverse reactions, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.

Systemic chemotherapy and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): A bidirectional approach for gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis

BACKGROUND

Few patients affected by gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) are offered locoregional treatment, despite several proof-of-efficacy trials. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has emerged in recent years as a promising tool to control peritoneal carcinomatosis. The combination of PIPAC with systemic chemotherapy may offer a greater clinical benefit than standard treatment alone.

METHODS

A single-center cohort of 28 consecutive patients affected by GCPM was scheduled for bidirectional treatment, comprising PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy, from September 2017 to September 2019. Data recorded included safety, efficacy and survival outcomes. Ascite volumes, the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) and pathological response through the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) were compared in those patients who underwent more than one PIPAC procedure.

RESULTS

Forty-six PIPAC procedures were administered, with a mean of 1.7 PIPAC procedures per patient. The median time to resume systemic chemotherapy after PIPAC was 6 days (range 4-7). Concerning safety, two grade 3-4 CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) toxicity events and one intraoperative complication were recorded. Thirteen patients repeated PIPAC. A pathological response was recorded in 61.5% of patients (one with complete and seven with partial regression). The median overall survival was 12.3 months in the overall population and 15.0 months in patients undergoing more than one PIPAC procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

A bidirectional approach for GCPM was feasible and safe, as the PIPAC procedure integrates well with several systemic chemotherapy regimens. The pathological response demonstrated the antitumoral efficacy of PIPAC. The proposed bidirectional approach may be further investigated in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: Efficiency of standard treatment methods

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis (PM), arising from gastric cancer (GC), is the most common pattern of synchronous and metachronous dissemination and is generally associated with poor prognosis. New therapeutic modalities are being increasingly employed for such patients.

AIM

To develop more advanced methods, it becomes necessary to study the results of existing standard treatment methods in patients with PM in order to perform a comparative analysis of the strategies.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the efficiency of standard treatment methods (i.e., palliative chemotherapy, palliative gastrectomy, and the best supportive care) was performed on 200 GC patients with synchronous PM.

RESULTS

The overall survival (OS) rate in 200 GC patients with PM under standard treatment was 5.4 mo. One-year survival occurred in 18.4% of patients. In multivariate analysis, the survival rate was significantly influenced by the following factors: Presence of extraperitoneal metastases, and stage of PM according to both the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (JGCA) and the peritoneal cancer index (PCI). The median OS and 1-year survival of patients with Р1, P2, and P3 (JGCA) carcinomatosis were 9.8 mo, 6.7 mo, and 4.0 mo, and 47.2%, 18.8%, and 5.1%, respectively. The application of the palliative gastrectomy resulted in an increase in the median OS by up to 17 mo compared to the conservative approach where the value was 8.5 mo (P = 0.05) in patients with Р1 РМ. In patients with Р3, palliative chemotherapy increased the OS by up to 5.6 mo compared to the OS of 3.2 mo (P = 0.0006) for best supportive care. The median OS and 1-year survival of patients with РCI of 1-6, 7-12 and 13+ points were 8.5 mo, 4.2 mo, and 4.1 mo, and 39.8%, 6.7%, and 5.5%, respectively. Palliative gastrectomy increased the median OS to 12.6 mo compared to conservative approach of 8.0 mo (P = 0.03) in patients with РCI of 1-6 points. In patients with РCI 13+ points, only palliative chemotherapy increased the OS to 6.0 mo compared to the OS of 3.4 mo for best supportive care (P = 0.0008).

CONCLUSION

GC patients with PM are characterized by extremely poor prognoses. Long-term survivors were found in the group with PCI of 1-6 points, and there was no survival difference in groups with PCI 7-12 vs PCI 13+ points. Palliative gastrectomy could prove effective in treating patients with early stage PM. The three standard treatment methods are equally effective for moderate stages of PM. In cases with advanced peritoneal carcinomatosis, a significant increase in prognosis was registered only after treatment with palliative chemotherapy.

Treatment of PERItoneal disease in Stomach Cancer with cytOreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraPEritoneal chemotherapy: PERISCOPE I initial results

BACKGROUND

The role of cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer is unknown. This non-randomized dose-finding phase I-II study was designed to assess the safety and feasibility of HIPEC, following systemic chemotherapy, in patients with gastric cancer and limited peritoneal dissemination. The maximum tolerated dose of normothermic intraperitoneal docetaxel in combination with a fixed dose of intraperitoneal oxaliplatin was also explored.

METHODS

Patients with resectable cT3-cT4a gastric adenocarcinoma with limited peritoneal metastases and/or tumour-positive peritoneal cytology were included. An open HIPEC technique was used with 460 mg/m² hyperthermic oxaliplatin for 30 min followed by normothermic docetaxel for 90 min in escalating doses (0, 50, 75 mg/m² ).

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2017, 37 patients were included. Of 25 patients who completed the full study protocol, four were treated at dose level 1 (0 mg/m² docetaxel), six at dose level 2 (50 mg/m² ) and four at dose level 3 (75 mg/m² ). At dose level 3, two dose-limiting toxicities occurred, both associated with postoperative ileus. Thereafter, another 11 patients were treated at dose level 2, with no more dose-limiting toxicities. Based on this, the maximum tolerated dose was 50 mg/m² intraperitoneal docetaxel. Serious adverse events were scored in 17 of 25 patients. The reoperation rate was 16 per cent (4 of 25) and the treatment-related mortality rate was 8 per cent (2 patients, both in dose level 3).

CONCLUSION

Gastrectomy combined with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC was feasible using 460 mg/m² oxaliplatin and 50 mg/m² normothermic docetaxel.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis: A multicenter propensity score-matched cohort study

Objective

Systemic chemotherapy has limited efficacy in the treatment of peritoneal metastasis (PM) in gastric cancer (GC). Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) combined with complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has shown promising outcomes but remains controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HIPEC without CRS in GC patients with PM.

Methods

This retrospective propensity score-matched multicenter cohort study included GC patients with PM treated with either chemotherapy alone (Cx group) or with HIPEC combined with chemotherapy (HIPEC-Cx group) in four Chinese high-volume gastric medical centers between 2010 and 2017. The primary outcomes were median survival time (MST) and 3-year overall survival (OS). Propensity score matching was performed to compensate for controlling potential confounding effects and selection bias.

Results

Of 663 eligible patients, 498 were matched. The MST in the Cx and HIPEC-Cx groups was 10.8 and 15.9 months, respectively [hazard ratio (HR)=0.71, 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.58−0.88; P=0.002]. The 3-year OS rate was 10.1% (95% CI, 5.4%−14.8%) and 18.4% (95% CI, 12.3%−24.5%) in the Cx and HIPEC-Cx groups, respectively (P=0.017). The complication rates were comparable. The time to first flatus and length of hospital stay for patients undergoing HIPEC combined with chemotherapy was longer than that of chemotherapy alone (4.6±2.4 dvs. 2.7±1.8 d, P<0.001; 14.2±5.8 dvs. 11.4±7.7 d, P<0.001), respectively. The median follow-up period was 33.2 months.

Conclusions

Compared with standard systemic chemotherapy, HIPEC combined with chemotherapy revealed a statistically significant survival benefit for GC patients with PM, without compromising patient safety.

Conversion Surgery with HIPEC for Peritoneal Oligometastatic Gastric Cancer

Peritoneal metastases (PM) of gastric cancer (GC) are characterized by a particularly poor prognosis, with median survival time of 6 months, and virtually no 5-year survival reported. Conversion therapy for GC is defined as a surgical treatment aiming at an R0 resection after systemic chemotherapy for tumours that were originally unresectable (or marginally resectable) for technical and/or oncological reasons. The aim of the present study was to evaluate early and late outcomes in GC patients with PM who underwent the cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after neoadjuvant (conversion) chemotherapy. Thirty patients with stage IV GC underwent CRS plus HIPEC. Severe grade III/IV (Clavien-Dindo classification) complications occurred in 13 (43%) patients. The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) ranged from 8.7 to 100 (median, 42.4). In the multivariate survival analysis, ypT2 and P3 (according to the Japanese classification of the PM severity) were favourable and adverse prognostic factors p = 0.031 and o = 0.035, respectively. Estimated 1- and 3-year survival was 73.9% and 36.6%, respectively. The median survival was 19.3 months. Conclusion: Conversion surgery, including extended gastrectomy and multi-organ resections followed by HIPEC performed after systemic chemotherapy therapy for GC with PM is justified in downstaged patients with ypT2 and limited (less than P3) PM.

The use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric malignancies

Introduction: Gastric cancer is the fourth/fifth most common malignancy worldwide, with only a quarter of patients achieving a 5-year survival rate. It has been estimated that 15-50% or more of patients have peritoneal disease upon surgical exploration. Until the early 1990s, peritoneal metastasis was considered as terminal stage of the disease; in the late 1990s, selected patients with peritoneal metastasis were recategorized as local disease. Over the past two decades, the treatment of peritoneal involvement has transformed, and cytoreductive surgery plus intraperitoneal therapy have drastically altered the natural course of several malignancies. Areas covered: We performed a review of studies available on PubMed from 1 January 2014 to 31 July 2019 and the analysis of their reference citations. We describe the most current intraperitoneal chemotherapy opportunities in the treatment of gastric cancer: hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (LHIPEC), neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), LHIPEC + NIPS, extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL), early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Expert opinion: Comprehensive treatment consisting of CRS combined with perioperative intraperitoneal/systemic chemotherapy can, today, be considered an effective strategy to improve the long-term survival of gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis.

Surgical management of metastatic gastric cancer: moving beyond the guidelines

Despite decreasing incidence, gastric cancer remains a major health problem worldwide and is associated with poor survival. The poor survival is mainly attributed to delayed presentation which may cause local or systemic metastases. The standard of care for patients with metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) is palliative chemotherapy with best supportive care. Although the survival has improved owing to advances in chemotherapeutic agents, it is still unsatisfactory, and some perspective changes are needed in the management of MGC to improve the outcomes. Therefore, various alternative treatment strategies for MGC have formed the most important research topics. Liver-directed treatment (LDT) options such as liver resection, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), microwave ablation (MWA), and hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) have been studied in the management of liver metastasis from gastric cancer (LMGC). Intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) in addition to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) aiming to remove all macroscopic tumor focus resulting from peritoneal dissemination is the treatment option for peritoneal metastasis, while para-aortic lymph node dissection is the treatment option for para-aortic lymph node metastasis which is considered to be M1 disease. Conversion surgery is a novel concept aiming at R0 resection for originally unresectable or marginally resectable tumors after a remarkably good response to the chemotherapy. Large amounts of data in the literature have demonstrated the benefits of individualized approaches such as the combination of systemic and local treatment options in selected patient groups. In this review, we aimed to explore the current and future treatment options by reviewing the literature on this controversial topic.

The Morphological Analysis of Cells in the Peritoneal Washing Fluids of Patients with Gastric Cancer

The cytology of peritoneal washing fluids for gastric cancer is the most basic method for judging peritoneal micrometastasis. However, the clinical value of this method is not clear at present. A retrospective analysis was performed on 277 patients with pathologically proven and surgically treated gastric cancer. The peritoneal washing fluids were collected after opening the abdomen and before the operation, and were sent to the cytology laboratory for screening of occult cancer cells in the collected washing fluids. The number of cases diagnosed as cancer cells, reactive mesothelial cells, serosal balls, and traumatic mesothelial cells were 42, 18, 27, and 190, respectively. Typical adenocarcinoma cell nests were found in eight of 10 T4b samples, whereas 34 cases of cancer cells in T3 and T4a showed that these cell nests usually contained mesothelial cells, and the three-dimensional stereoscopic sense of the nests was not obvious. In the specific subcellular morphological changes of both reactive mesothelial cells and serosal balls, the changes of both the contour of nuclear membrane and the polarity of cell alignment were present only in stage T3 and T4a. The presence or absence of mesothelial cells in the nests of cancer cells and the changes of the contour of nuclear membrane and of the polarity of cell alignment in reactive mesothelial cells or serosal balls may help us to predict the depth of invasion of cancer cells.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus palliative systemic chemotherapy in stomach cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination, the study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (PERISCOPE II)

BACKGROUND

At present, palliative systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment in the Netherlands for gastric cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination. In contrast to lymphatic and haematogenous dissemination, peritoneal dissemination may be regarded as locoregional spread of disease. Administering cytotoxic drugs directly into the peritoneal cavity has an advantage over systemic chemotherapy since high concentrations can be delivered directly into the peritoneal cavity with limited systemic toxicity. The combination of a radical gastrectomy with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in patients with gastric cancer in Asia. However, the results obtained in Asian patients cannot be extrapolated to Western patients. The aim of this study is to compare the overall survival between patients with gastric cancer with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy, and those treated with gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this multicentre randomised controlled two-armed phase III trial, 106 patients will be randomised (1:1) between palliative systemic chemotherapy only (standard treatment) and gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC (experimental treatment) after 3-4 cycles of systemic chemotherapy.Patients with gastric cancer are eligible for inclusion if (1) the primary cT3-cT4 gastric tumour including regional lymph nodes is considered to be resectable, (2) limited peritoneal dissemination (Peritoneal Cancer Index < 7) and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology are confirmed by laparoscopy or laparotomy, and (3) systemic chemotherapy was given (prior to inclusion) without disease progression.

DISCUSSION

The PERISCOPE II study will determine whether gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with systemic chemotherapy, gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC have a survival benefit over patients treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy only.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT03348150 ; registration date November 2017; first enrolment November 2017; expected end date December 2022; trial status: Ongoing.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in combined treatment of locally advanced and intraperitonealy disseminated gastric cancer: A retrospective cooperative Central-Eastern European study

Background and Objectives

Clinical experience in Western Europe suggests that cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are promising methods in the management of gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastases. However, there are almost no data on such treatment results in patient from Central‐Eastern European population.

Methods

A retrospective cooperative study was performed at 6 Central‐Eastern European HIPEC centers. HIPEC was used in 117 patients for the following indications: treatment of GC with limited overt peritoneal metastases (n = 70), adjuvant setting after radical gastrectomy (n = 37) and palliative approach for elimination of severe ascites without gastrectomy (n = 10).

Results

Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 29.1% and 5.1%, respectively. Median overall survival in the groups with therapeutic, adjuvant, and palliative indications was 12.6, 34, and 3.5 months. The only long‐term survivors occurred in the group with peritoneal cancer index (PCI) of 0‐6 points without survival difference in groups with PCI 7‐12 vs PCI 13 or more points.

Conclusions

GC patients with limited peritoneal metastases can benefit from CRS + HIPEC. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy could be an effective method of adjuvant treatment of GC with a high risk of intraperitoneal progression. No long‐term survival may be expected after palliative approach to HIPEC.

The role of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy in the management of gastric cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The quest to cure or to contain the disease in cancer patients leads to new strategies and techniques being added to the armamentarium of oncologists. Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a recently described surgical technique which is being evaluated at many centers for the management of peritoneal metastasis (PM). The present study is a systematic review to evaluate the current role of PIPAC in the management of gastric cancer associated PM.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed and EMBASE database using relevant keywords and confirming to the PRISMA guidelines to identify the articles describing the role of PIPAC in gastric cancer associated PM. All the studies which were published prior to July 1, 2018 in English literature and reported the role of PIPAC in gastric cancer associated PM were included in the systematic review.

RESULTS

The search yielded 79 articles; there were ten published studies which have reported the use of PIPAC in gastric cancer associated PM. A total of 129 patients with gastric cancer associated PM were treated in the studies. Only two studies had an exclusive cohort of gastric cancer patients while eight other studies had a heterogeneous population with a small proportion of gastric cancer patients. There was only one study highlighting the role of PIPAC in neoadjuvant setting to downgrade the peritoneal carcinomatosis index. All the studies revealed that PIPAC is feasible and has minimal perioperative morbidity, even after repeated applications.

CONCLUSION

There is a scarcity of English literature related to the role of PIPAC in gastric cancer associated PM. PIPAC is a safe and well-tolerated procedure which has the potential to contain spreading PM. Further studies are warranted to better define the role of PIPAC in gastric cancer associated PM.