Effects of CytoReductive surgery plus hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) versus CytoReductive surgery for ovarian cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Expert consensus: Profiling and management of advanced or metastatic epithelial ovarian cancer

Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the “The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the “ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference” were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive “Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie – AGO” score or “I-model” positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

Should We Abandon Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer? A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the gynaecological malignancy with the highest mortality and diagnosis often occurs in its advanced stages. Standard treatment in these cases is based on complete cytoreductive surgery with adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy. Other types of treatment are being evaluated to improve the prognosis of these patients, including intraperitoneal chemotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy. These may improve survival or time to relapse in addition to intravenous chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis is to determine whether treatment with intravenous chemotherapy remains the gold standard, or whether the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy has a benefit in overall survival (OS) and disease-free interval (DFS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was carried out in Pubmed and Cochrane, selecting clinical studies and systematic reviews published in the last 10 years. Statistical analysis was performed using the hazard ratio measure in the RevMan tool.

RESULTS

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy shows a benefit in OS and DFS compared with standard intravenous chemotherapy. The significant differences in OS (HR: 0.81 CI 95% 0.74-0.88) and in DFS (HR: 0.81 CI 95% 0.75-0.87) are statistically significant (p < 0.00001). There were no clinical differences in toxicity and side-effects.

CONCLUSION

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy is an option that improves OS and DFS without significant toxicity regarding the use of intravenous chemotherapy alone. However, prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal dose and treatment regimen that will maintain the benefits while minimising side effects and toxicity and the profile of patients who will benefit most from this treatment.

Cytoreduction Plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Primary and Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Single-Center Cohort Study

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most frequent cause of death among women with gynecologic malignant tumors. Primary debulking surgery (PDS) with maximal surgical effort to reach completeness of cytoreduction, followed by chemotherapy, has become the standard of care; moreover, some experiences have shown that a comprehensive treatment approach of surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) could improve the prognosis of ovarian cancer. We carried out a retrospective analysis of all consecutive sixty-six patients diagnosed with primary advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer who underwent debulking surgery plus HIPEC in a single center between September 2005 and October 2020. For 33 patients with primary EOC, with a median follow-up period of 70 months, the median overall survival was 56 months (range: 48.1–96.9); and the median disease-free survival (DFS) was 13 months (range: 19.9–53.7). In the recurrent population, the median follow-up period was 78 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 82 months (range: 48.1–96.9), and the median DFS was 17 months (range: 19.7–53.0). In our study, we have found that CRS plus HIPEC is feasible, with very low rates of major complications and good results in terms of overall survival.

Progress in the Treatment of Peritoneal Metastatic Cancer and the Application of Therapeutic Nanoagents

Peritoneal metastatic cancer is a cancer caused by the direct growth of cancer cells from the primary site through the bloodstream, lymph, or peritoneum, which is a difficult part of current clinical treatment. In the abdominal cavity of patients with metastatic peritoneal cancer, there are usually nodules of various sizes and malignant ascites. Among them, nodules of different sizes can obstruct intestinal movement and form intestinal obstruction, while malignant ascites can cause abdominal distension and discomfort, and even cause patients to have difficulty in breathing. The pathology and physiology of peritoneal metastatic cancer are complex and not fully understood. The main hypothesis is "seed" and "soil"; i.e., cells from the primary tumor are shed and implanted in the peritoneal cavity (peritoneal metastasis). In the last two decades, the main treatment modalities used clinically are cytoreductive surgery (CRS), systemic chemotherapy, intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and combined treatment, all of which help to improve patient survival and quality of life (QOL). However, the small-molecule chemotherapeutic drugs used clinically still have problems such as rapid drug metabolism and systemic toxicity. With the rapid development of nanotechnology in recent years, therapeutic nanoagents for the treatment of peritoneal metastatic cancer have been gradually developed, which has improved the therapeutic effect and reduced the systemic toxicity of small-molecule chemotherapeutic drugs to a certain extent. In addition, nanomaterials have been developed not only as therapeutic agents but also as imaging agents to guide peritoneal tumor CRS. In this review, we describe the etiology and pathological features of peritoneal metastatic cancer, discuss in detail the clinical treatments that have been used for peritoneal metastatic cancer, and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the different clinical treatments and the QOL of the treated patients, followed by a discussion focusing on the progress, obstacles, and challenges in the use of therapeutic nanoagents in peritoneal metastatic cancer. Finally, therapeutic nanoagents and therapeutic tools that may be used in the future for the treatment of peritoneal metastatic cancer are prospected.

Localized chemotherapy approaches and advanced drug delivery strategies: a step forward in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is a common outcome of epithelial ovarian carcinoma and is the leading cause of death for these patients. Tumor location, extent, peculiarities of the microenvironment, and the development of drug resistance are the main challenges that need to be addressed to improve therapeutic outcome. The development of new procedures such as HIPEC (Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy) and PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) have enabled locoregional delivery of chemotherapeutics, while the increasingly efficient design and development of advanced drug delivery micro and nanosystems are helping to promote tumor targeting and penetration and to reduce the side effects associated with systemic chemotherapy administration. The possibility of combining drug-loaded carriers with delivery via HIPEC and PIPAC represents a powerful tool to improve treatment efficacy, and this possibility has recently begun to be explored. This review will discuss the latest advances in the treatment of PC derived from ovarian cancer, with a focus on the potential of PIPAC and nanoparticles in terms of their application to develop new therapeutic strategies and future prospects.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Effectiveness of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Associated with Cytoreductive Surgery in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer remains controversial. Our study aims to analyze the overall survival and disease-free survival for the use of HIPEC as a treatment for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out using PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of six studies were used, comprising a total of 674 patients.

RESULTS

The results of our meta-analysis of all studies analyzed together (observational and randomized controlled trials (RCT)) did not achieve significant results. Contrary to the OS (HR = 0.56, 95% IC = 0.33-0.95, p = 0.03) and DFS (HR = 0.61, 95% IC = 0.43-0.86, p < 0.01) of the RCT analyzed separately, a clear impact on survival was suggested. The subgroup analysis showed that studies making use of higher temperatures (≥42 °C) for a shorter period of time (≤60 min) achieved better results for both OS and DFS, as well as the use of cisplatin as the form of chemotherapy in HIPEC. Moreover, the use of HIPEC did not increase high-grade complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of HIPEC to cytoreductive surgery demonstrates an improvement in OS and DFS for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer in advanced stages, without an increase in the number of complications. The use of cisplatin as chemotherapy in HIPEC obtained better results.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The value of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) at the time of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is controversial and its use remains experimental in most national and international guidelines. We wished to systematically evaluate all available evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of data from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted from the first report on HIPEC in EOC till April 3, 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the HIPEC and control groups. This meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265810).

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (10 case-control studies and 5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) were included in the present meta-analysis. Based on the time interval between the last systemic chemotherapy exposure and timing of CRS +/- HIPEC, all studies and patients' cohorts we classified into recent (<6 months; n = 9 studies/patients cohorts) and non-recent (≥6 months, n = 8 studies/patients cohorts) chemotherapy exposure groups. In the recent chemotherapy exposure group, HIPEC was associated with improvement of both PFS (HR, 0.585; 95% CI, 0.422-0.811) and OS (HR, 0.519; 95% CI, 0.346-0.777). On the contrary, in the non-recent chemotherapy exposure group, HIPEC failed to significantly affect PFS (HR, 1.037; 95% CI, 0.684-1.571) or OS (HR, 0.932; 95% CI, 0.607-1.430). Consistent results were observed in subsequent sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our present meta-analysis demonstrates that the value of HIPEC at CRS for EOC appears to depend on the timing of the last systemic chemotherapy exposure. Future trials are awaited to define the role of HIPEC in EOC.

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in small bowel adenocarcinoma with peritoneal metastasis: a systematic review

Objectives

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) with peritoneal metastasis (PM) is rare and despite treatment with systemic chemotherapy, the prognosis is poor. However, there is emerging evidence that cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may offer a survival benefit over systemic therapy alone. This systematic review will assess the effectiveness of CRS-HIPEC for SBA-PM.

Content

Three databases were searched from inception to 11/10/21. Clinical outcomes were extracted and analysed.

Summary

A total of 164 cases of SBA-PM undergoing CRS-HIPEC were identified in 12 studies. The majority of patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy (87/164, 53%) and complete cytoreduction (143/164, 87%) prior to HIPEC. The median overall survival was 9-32 months and 5-year survival ranged from 25 to 40%. Clavien-Dindo grade III/IV morbidity ranged between 19.1 and 50%, while overall mortality was low with only 3 treatment-related deaths.

Outlook

CRS-HIPEC has the potential to improve the overall survival in a highly selected group of SBA-PM patients, with 5-year survival rates comparable to those reported in colorectal peritoneal metastases. However, the expected survival benefits need to be balanced against the intrinsic risk of morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure. Further multicentre studies are required to assess the safety and feasibility of CRS-HIPEC in SBA-PM to guide best practice management for this rare disease.

Prolonged Exposition with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) May Provide Survival Benefit after Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) in Advanced Primary Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancer

Background: The usage of cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced gynecological cancers is increasing. Methods: Prospectively collected data of 85 advanced primary ovarian/fallopian tube cancer and peritoneal carcinoma patients of a single center were investigated. Results: A total 48, 37, 62, and 25 patients were enrolled into the HIPEC with/without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (upfront vs. interval) and into the 60 min and 90 min long HIPEC groups, respectively. Better overall survival (OS) was observed in the 90 min HIPEC group (p = 0.0330), compared to the 60 min HIPEC group. Neither OS (p = 0. 2410), disease-specific (p = 0. 3670), nor recurrence-free survival (p = 0.8240) differed between upfront and interval HIPEC. Higher peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) values were associated with worse disease-specific survival (p = 0.0724). Age (p = 0.0416), body mass index (p = 0.0044), PCI (p < 0.0001), the type (p = 0.0016) and duration (p = 0.0012) of HIPEC, and increased perioperative morbidity (p < 0.0041) had the greatest impact on OS. Conclusions: Increasing data support the value of HIPEC in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Ongoing prospective studies will definitively clarify the role and timing of this additional therapeutic approach.

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Cytoreductive Surgery in Ovarian Cancer: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses

Background

The utility of heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has been assessed in several randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses, and it is still a subject of controversy. Therefore, we performed an umbrella review of existing meta-analyses to summarise the outcomes of HIPEC and cytoreductive surgery (CRS) association in ovarian cancer.

Methods

We examined the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Prospero, Web of Science and Science Direct from inception to May 30, 2020, for meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Analyses of overall survival, disease free survival and progression survival were performed separately for primary and recurrent ovarian cancers.

Results

We identified 6 meta-analyses investigating the association of HIPEC with CRS in the management of ovarian cancer. Three year overall survival was significantly improved by the association of CRS and HIPEC for primary (HR: 0.66, 95%CI:0.56-0.78) and recurrent ovarian cancers (HR:0.50, 95%CI:0.38-0.64). This benefit was also demonstrated on disease-free survival for primary (HR: 0.54, 95%CI:0.48-0.61) and recurrent ovarian cancer (HR: 0.60, 95%CI:0.46-0.78). The pooled hazard ratios confirmed the advantage of HIPEC and CRS association with respect to CRS alone on progression free survival for primary and recurrent ovarian cancer respectively with HR: 0.50, 95%CI: 0.43-0.58 and HR: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.41-0.85.

Conclusion

While waiting for the results of the current prospective studies, the present umbrella study suggests that HIPEC performed at the end of CRS may be a complementary effective asset for ovarian cancer patient management.

The Role of Hyperthermia in the Treatment of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hyperthermia is used to treat peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM), particularly during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). This manuscript provides a focused update of hyperthermia in the treatment of PSM.

RECENT FINDINGS

The heterogeneous response to hyperthermia in PSM can be explained by tumor and treatment conditions. PSM tumors may resist hyperthermia via metabolic and immunologic adaptation. The thermodynamics of HIPEC are complex and require computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The clinical evidence supporting the benefit of hyperthermia is largely observational. Continued research will allow clinicians to characterize and predict the individual response of PSM to hyperthermia. The application of hyperthermia in current HIPEC protocols is mostly empirical. Thus, modeling heat transfer with CFD is a necessary task if we are to achieve consistent and reproducible hyperthermia. Although observational evidence suggests a survival benefit of hyperthermia, no clinical trial has tested the individual role of hyperthermia in PSM.

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Alternative Splicing: A New Therapeutic Target for Ovarian Cancer

Background: Increasing evidences have shown that abnormal alternative splicing (AS) events are closely related to the prognosis of various tumors. However, the role of AS in ovarian cancer (OV) is poorly understood. This study aims to explore the correlation between AS and the prognosis of OV and establish a prognostic model for OV. Methods: We downloaded the RNA-seq data of OV from The Cancer Genome Atlas databases and assessed cancer-specific AS through the SpliceSeq software. Then systemically investigated the overall survival (OS)-related AS and splicing factors (SFs) by bioinformatics analysis. The nomogram was established based on the clinical information, and the clinical practicability of the nomogram was verified through the calibration curve. Finally, a splicing correlation network was constructed to reveal the relationship between OS-related AS and SFs. Results: A total of 48,049 AS events were detected from 10,582 genes, of which 1523 were significantly associated with OS. The area under the curve of the final prediction model was 0.785, 0.681, and 0.781 in 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Moreover, the nomogram showed high calibration and discrimination in OV patients. Spearman correlation analysis was used to determine 8 SFs significantly related to survival, including major facilitator superfamily domain containing 11, synaptotagmin binding cytoplasmic RNA interacting protein, DEAH-box helicase 35, CWC15, integrator complex subunit 1, LUC7 like 2, cell cycle and apoptosis regulator 1, and heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein A2/B1. Conclusion: This study provides a prognostic model related to AS in OV, and constructs an AS-clinicopathological nomogram, which provides the possibility to predict the long-term prognosis of OV patients. We have explored the wealth of RNA splicing networks and regulation patterns related to the prognosis of OV, which provides a large number of biomarkers and potential targets for the treatment of OV. Put forward the potential possibility of interfering with the AS of OV in the comprehensive treatment of OV.

Prise en charge chirurgicale du cancer épithélial de l'ovaire - première ligne et première rechute: Surgical management of epithelial ovarian cancer - first line and first relapse

Based on recently published data, these recommendations present some evolutions in the surgical management of high grade epithelial ovarian cancers. In apparently early stages (FIGO I and II), surgical staging must be undertaken to confirm the absence of both peritoneal lesions and lymph node involvement (that might change stage and management). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not indicated, surgical exploration should be performed upfront, by laparotomy, to reduce the risk of rupture of the primary tumor. In advanced stages, the first step is to evaluate the feasibility of primary surgery with complete tumor cytoreduction. If it appears unfeasible, 3 or 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy are administered before interval surgey. Whether it is implemented in the primary or interval setting, surgery must be performed by experimented teams, in an approved facility, having developed a rehabilitation program. Lymph node dissection is not mandatory if no adenopathies have been identified by imaging and by peroperative palpation. At first relapse, the surgical decision must be made by a multidisciplinary team, using scores predictive of complete cytoreduction (AGO or iMODEL criteria). Similarly as in first line, the objective is to achieve resection without any residual disease. Surveillance after first-line treatment must be adapted, according to the probability of another complete cytoreduction in case of late relapse, especially in patients who benefited from primary complete surgery and maintained good performance status.

Cytoreductive Surgery With or Without HIPEC After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Ovarian Cancer: A Phase 3 Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and administration of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have shown their efficacy in multiple malignancies and also could offer a prognostic benefit for patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, parallel-group, randomized phase 3 clinical trial analyzed patients with a diagnosis of carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy (NACT). In this trial, 71 patients were randomized to receive CRS alone (36 patients) or CRS with HIPEC (35 patients) using cisplatin (75 mg/m² for 60 min at 42 °C). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Overall survival (OS), morbidity, and quality of life (QoL) were the secondary end points.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 32 months, the median DFS was 12 months in the control group (CRS) and 18 months in the experimental group (CRS and HIPEC). The findings showed HIPEC to be an independent protective factor against the development of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 0.12, 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.89; p = 0.038). The median OS was 45 months in the control group and 52 months in the experimental group. The respective morbidity rates for any grade (1 to 5) were respectively 58.3 % and 45.7 % (p > 0.05), with a mortality rates of 2.8 % and 2.9 % (p > 0.05). In the dimensions evaluated, CRS with or without HIPEC had no impact on QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who had advanced ovarian cancer treated with NACT, CRS and HIPEC was associated with better DFS and OS, but without a difference in postoperative morbidity, mortality, or in the QoL evaluation.

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastasis of non-primary origin

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to analyze the role of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy that has developed in the treatment of patients with peritoneal metastasis of non-primary origin.

METHODS

Patients who underwent treatment for secondary gastrointestinal and ovarian malignancies over a 20-year period were reviewed. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier product limit method and the log-rank test was used to assess differences between subgroups.

RESULTS

The study included 293 patients. The most common histology was ovarian cancer (56.3%). Median PCI was 16 and CC0-1 resection was obtained in 88.1% of cases. Grade III and IV complications occurred in 12 patients (4.1%) and 47 patients (16%), respectively. The 30- and 60-day mortality rate was 1.3% (4 patients) and 2.4% (7 patients). Five-year OS was 21.7%, 73.6%, 42.1%, and 0 for colorectal, appendiceal, ovarian, and gastric cancer (p =  < 0.0001), respectively, whereas 5-year DFS was 12.4%, 48.4%, 24.3%, and 0 (p =  < 0.0001), respectively. Survival outcomes were significantly higher for CC0 in each subgroup of patients.

CONCLUSION

Despite being a complex procedure, cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy should be considered a safe treatment with acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, if performed in high-volume centers. Good survival outcomes have been increasingly obtained in selected patients with peritoneal metastasis of non-primary origin.

Establishment of an Experimental System for Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in a Rat Model

AIM

To establish an experimental system for comparing different methods of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a rat model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used six-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats, and created an early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) system using 18-gauge syringes and evacuators, and a hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) system using two peristaltic pumps which controlled the flow rate and temperature. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) was achieved using a nozzle for dispersing aerosols at a flow rate up to 41.5 ml/min. The distribution and intensity of 0.2% trypan blue dye was compared among three methods.

RESULTS

The distribution was limited and the intensity was weak after EPIC, and the dye stained moderately in gravity-dependent regions after HIPEC. On the other hand, the distribution was the most comprehensive, and the intensity was the greatest after PIPAC.

CONCLUSION

This experimental system in a rat model may reflect the comparative effect among EPIC, HIPEC and PIPAC in humans.

Translational and pharmacological principles of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

The long-term survival of advanced-stage ovarian cancer patients remains poor, despite extensive cytoreductive surgery, chemotherapy, and the recent addition of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown survival benefit by specifically targeting peritoneal metastases, the primary site of disease recurrence. Different aspects of how HIPEC exerts its effect remain poorly understood. Improved understanding of the effects of hyperthermia on ovarian cancer cells, the synergy of hyperthermia with intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and the pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties of intraperitoneally administered cisplatin may help identify ways to optimize the efficacy of HIPEC. This review provides an overview of these translational and pharmacological principles of HIPEC and aims to expose knowledge gaps that may direct further research to optimize the HIPEC procedure and ultimately improve survival for women with advanced ovarian cancer.

Cytoreductive Surgery plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Improves Survival with Acceptable Safety for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Clinical Study of 100 Patients

Background

The mainstay of treatment for advanced ovarian cancer is debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy that includes carboplatin and paclitaxel, but the prognosis is poor. This study is aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS+HIPEC) as first-line surgical treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC).

Methods

FIGO stage III/IV AOC patients underwent CRS+HIPEC as first-line surgical treatment at our center from December 2007 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was safety.

Results

Among 100 patients, the median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score was 80 (50-100), median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 19 (1-39), median completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score was 1 (0-3), number of organ regions removed was 4 (3-9), number of peritoneal regions removed was 4 (1-9), and number of anastomoses was 1 (0-4). The median follow-up was 36.8 months; 75 (75.0%) patients were still alive, and 25 (25.0%) had died. The median overall survival (mOS) was 87.6 (95% CI: 72.1-103.0) months, and the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates were 94.1%, 77.2%, 68.2%, 64.2%, and 64.2%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that better mOS correlated with an age ≤, KPS ≥ 80, ascites ≤ 1000 ml, PCI < 19, and CC score 0-1. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that CC was an independent factor for OS; patients who underwent CRS with a CC score 0-1 had a mPFS of 67.8 (95% CI: 48.3-87.4) months. The perioperative serious adverse event and morbidity rates were 4.0% and 2.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

CRS+HIPEC improves survival for AOC patients with acceptable safety at experienced high-volume centers. Stringent patient selection and complete CRS are key factors for better survival.

Twelve-Year Single Center Experience Shows Safe Implementation of Developed Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Treatment Protocols for Gastrointestinal and Gynecological Primary Tumors

Simple Summary

The treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) has dramatically evolved during the past two decades. Indications, treatment protocols, surgical techniques and the application of HIPEC in the prophylactic setting were evaluated in the surgical community. Nevertheless, the current results of the PRODIGE-7 trial disfavored the application of HIPEC for PSM of colorectal cancer and raised uncertainty among surgeons. On the other hand, cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC represent state-of-the-art therapy for peritoneal mesothelioma (except the sarcomatoid-subtype) and pseudomyxoma peritonei. Comparing the literature is cumbersome due to the variety of HIPEC protocols and differences in indication settings. This article aims to provide an insight into the impact of different HIPEC protocols, different indication settings and the implementation of pre-HIPEC laparoscopy on patients’ morbidity rates and outcomes and serves as guidance for surgeons dealing with these patients in order to guarantee high-quality treatment.

Abstract

(1) Background: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy provide survival benefits to selected patients. We aimed to report our experience and the evolution of our peritoneal surface malignancy program. (2) Methods: From June 2005 to June 2017, 399 patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy at the Tübingen University Hospital were analyzed from a prospectively collected database. (3) Results: Peritoneal metastasis from colorectal cancer was the leading indication (group 1: 28%; group 2: 32%). The median PCI was 15.5 (range, 1–39) in group 1 and 11 (range, 1–39) in group 2 (p = 0.002). Regarding the completeness of cytoreduction (CC), a score of 0 was achieved in 63% vs. 69% for group 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.010). Median overall survival rates for patients in group 1 and 2 for colon cancer, ovarian cancer, gastric cancer and appendix cancer were 34 and 25 months; 45 months and not reached; 30 and 16 months; 39 months and not reached, respectively. The occurrence of grade-III and -IV complications slightly differed between groups (14.5% vs. 15.6%). No 30-day mortality occurred. (4) Conclusions: Specialized centers are able to provide low-morbidity cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy without mortality. Strict patient selection during the time period significantly improved CC scores.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer with peritoneal metastases, systematic review of the literature and focused personal experience

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) causes 60% of ovarian cancer cases and is the fourth most common cause of death from cancer in women. The standard of care for EOC includes a combination of surgery followed by intravenous chemotherapy. Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy (CT) has been introduced into the therapeutic algorithm of EOC with positive results. To explore existing results regarding intraperitoneal chemotherapy a systematic review of the literature and an analysis of our own institutional prospective database of patients treated with cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for EOC at different stages were conducted. The focused report concerning our personal experience with advanced EOC treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC produced the following results: In 57 patients cisplatin + paclitaxel as HIPEC was the only significant factor improving overall survival (OS) at multivariate analysis (OR 6.54, 95% CI: 1.24-34.47, P=0.027). Patients treated with HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel showed a median OS of 46 months (SD 6.4, 95% CI: 33.4-58.6), while patients treated with other HIPEC regimens showed a median OS of 12 months (SD 3.1, 95% CI: 6.0-18.0). The 2y-OS was 72% and 3y-OS was 68% for cisplatin + paclitaxel as HIPEC, while the 2y- and 3y-OS was 0% for other HIPEC regimens. Patients treated with HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel showed a median disease-free survival (DFS) of 13 months (SD 1.6, 95% CI: 9.9-16.1), while patients treated with other HIPEC regimens showed a median DFS of 8 months (SD 3.1, 95% CI: 1.9-14.1). In conclusion, HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel in ovarian cancer showed positive results that may be considered semi-definitive according to the level of evidence and should be considered a starting point for further investigations. At present HIPEC cisplatin + paclitaxel should be proposed to patients with advanced ovarian cancer as standard treatment at almost all stages of disease. Platinum + taxane-based intraperitoneal regimens demonstrated superior results compared to other regimens.

Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A 20-Year Single-Center Experience

Despite improvement in treatments, the peritoneum remains the primary site of relapse in most ovarian cancer cases. Patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis from epithelial ovarian cancer were reviewed. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox analyses were used to identify survival rates and prognostic factors. This study included 158 patients. The procedure was mostly performed for recurrent disease (46.8%) and high-grade serous carcinoma (58.2%). The median peritoneal cancer index was 14, and complete cytoreduction was obtained in 87.9% of cases. Grade IV morbidity occurred in 15.2% of patients, mostly requiring surgical reoperation, and one patient (0.6%) died within 90 days. The median follow-up was 63.5 months. The Kaplan-Meier 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 42.1% and 24.3%, respectively. Multiple regression logistic analyses demonstrated that the completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score (p ≤ 0.0001), pancreatic resection (p ≤ 0.0001) and number of resections (p = 0.001) were significant factors influencing OS; whereas the CC score (p ≤ 0.0001) and diaphragmatic procedures (p = 0.01) were significant for DFS. The addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy to standard multimodality therapy may improve outcomes in both primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer without impairing early postoperative results, but the exact timing has not yet been established. Prospective randomized studies will clarify the role and indications of this approach.

HIPEC: Turning up the heat on ovarian cancer

Clinical trials of heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC ) for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer are showing promising survival outcomes. HIPEC has the potential to eliminate ovarian cancer cells from peritoneal surfaces more effectively than systemic chemotherapy through enhanced pharmacokinetic and hyperthermia effects. However, many questions remain to be answered, particularly regarding the true place of HIPEC in the current era of new and effective targeted treatments. Concerns around the potential for increased morbidity, adverse effects on quality of life, and increased resource use following HIPEC use, can only be properly evaluated with ongoing high-quality clinical trials.

An overview and update of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

Despite, the strong rationale and evidence of the benefit of postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer, it has not been widely adopted, mainly due to its high morbidity and logistical difficulties. Intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a more tolerable and technically feasible method of intraperitoneal chemotherapy, whereas other potential advantages include homogenous drug distribution, application before tumor regrowth and combination with hyperthermia, which is directly cytotoxic and enhances the efficacy of many drugs.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors explain the rationale and indications for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC in advanced ovarian cancer. Data of major clinical studies, meta-analyses, and recent randomized trials are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

After many encouraging clinical studies and meta-analyses, a recent randomized study demonstrated survival benefit for HIPEC during interval CRS in primary ovarian cancer, without increased morbidity, whereas another implied its benefit in recurrent ovarian cancer. Results of recently completed and numerous ongoing randomized studies will further determine the benefit of HIPEC in ovarian cancer at different time points. Patient selection and appraisal of the best protocols are crucial. The field of gynecological oncology will most likely evolve to include HIPEC eventually as a routine treatment for ovarian cancer.

Secondary surgical cytoreduction needs to be assessed taking into account surgical technique, completeness of cytoreduction, and extent of disease

Recent evidence suggested that secondary surgical cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy does not result in longer overall survival in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

This statement is based on a phase III multicenter, randomized clinical trial that lacks a description of the surgical protocol, the surgical technique, and the surgical variables. In a study that evaluates surgical cytoreduction, it is mandatory to assess the grade of cytoreductive surgery achieved (Sugarbaker PH, Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 384:576–87, 1999), the extent of disease using PCI (Peritoneal Cancer Index), the technique itself, and the existence of a multidisciplinary approach with extensive upper abdominal procedures in experienced centers (Ren et al, BMC Cancer 15:1-12, 2015). There is evidence proving that the quality of cytoreduction (Al Rawahi et al, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013, 2013), the measurement of the amount of disease by PCI (Elzarkaa et al, J Gynecol Oncol 29, 2018), and a multidisciplinary approach with supramesocolic procedures (Ren et al, BMC Cancer 15:1-12, 2015) impact overall survival.

This study fails to compare chemotherapy with secondary cytoreductive surgery since, due to the lack of variables, we can assess neither the performed surgery nor its criteria. This study should not be taken into account to recommend chemotherapy alone over a surgical approach in this group of patients.

Oncologic outcomes and morbidity following heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy at cytoreductive surgery for primary epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has not been universally adopted at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery for primary epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) despite evidence of a 12-month overall survival (OS) benefit in a recent landmark randomized trial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess oncologic outcomes and perioperative morbidity following HIPEC among primary EOC patients.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from inception to August 2019, for observational and randomized studies of primary EOC patients undergoing HIPEC. We assessed risk of bias using the Institute of Health Economics Quality Appraisal Checklist for single-arm cohort studies, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for comparative cohort studies, and Cochrane Collaboration's Tool for randomized trials. We qualitatively summarized survival outcomes and calculated the pooled proportion of 30-day grade III-IV morbidity and postoperative death.

RESULTS

We identified 35 articles including 2252 primary EOC patients; one study was a randomized trial, and only six studies included a comparator group of surgery alone. The timing, temperature, and chemotherapeutic agents used for HIPEC differed across studies. Reported OS was highly variable (3-year OS range: 46-77%); three comparative cohort studies and the sole randomized trial reported statistically significant survival benefits for HIPEC over surgery alone, while two comparative cohort studies did not. The pooled proportions for grade III-IV morbidity and postoperative death at 30 days were 34% (95% CI 20-52) and 0% (95% CI 0-5) respectively.

CONCLUSION

One randomized trial suggests that HIPEC at time of interval cytoreductive surgery should be considered in patients with primary EOC. However, there is significant heterogeneity in literature with respect to an appropriate HIPEC regimen, short- and long-term outcomes. High-quality prospective randomized trials are urgently needed to clarify the role of HIPEC in the first-line treatment of primary EOC.

Postoperative pain pathophysiology and treatment strategies after CRS + HIPEC for peritoneal cancer

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a treatment choice for peritoneal cancer. However, patients commonly suffer from severe postoperative pain. The pathophysiology of postoperative pain is considered to be from both nociceptive and neuropathic origins.

Main body

The recent advances on the etiology of postoperative pain after CRS + HIPEC treatment were described, and the treatment strategy and outcomes were summarized.

Conclusion

Conventional analgesics could provide short-term symptomatic relief. Thoracic epidural analgesia combined with opioids administration could be an effective treatment choice. In addition, a transversus abdominis plane block could also be an alternative option, although further studies should be performed.

Survey on the current gynaecological approach of ovarian cancer patients: The utility of HIPEC

BACKGROUND

The aim of this survey was to acquire an overview of the current management of ovarian cancer with an emphasis on the utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).Methods: An email was sent to Oncologists prior to PSOGI International Symposium on Advanced Ovarian Cancer, Athens 11-13 April 2019. Doctors submitted responses on the relevant website. The self-report survey contained 17 questions.

RESULTS

In total, 467 Medical Oncologists, Surgical Oncologists or Gynaecologic Oncologists were participated and answered to this survey. The resectability of disease was evaluated by laparoscopy from 48.5% of the participants, while 51.5% answered that they stage their patients pre-surgically with the use of CT or MRI. The preferred first intervention in advanced ovarian cancer patients is the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery (72%). Regarding the use of HIPEC, almost half of the participants answered that there is role of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer patients undergoing interval debulking surgery, while almost 70% answered positively about the utility of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer recurrence. As for the role of lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer patients, half of the responders answered negatively. Finally, only 25% of the participants responded that they always check the BRCA status of their ovarian cancer patients, despite the possible differentiation of treatment based on the molecular profiling (80%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this survey indicate the utility of HIPEC in treatment of ovarian cancer patients and the differences in the overall management of ovarian cancer patients in the current clinical practice.