Downstaging of lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy in gastric carcinoma with peritoneal metastasis

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Extrahepatic Biliary Tract Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Survival Analysis

Background: Although surgery is the mainstay of curative-intent treatment for extrahepatic biliary tract cancer (EBTC), recurrence following surgery can be high and prognosis poor. The impact of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) relative to upfront surgery (US) among patients with EBTC remains unclear. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) databases was utilized to identify patients who underwent surgery from 2006 to 2017 for EBTC, including gallbladder cancer (GBC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC). Trends in NAT utilization were investigated, and the impact of NAT on prognosis was compared with US using a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. Results: Among 6582 EBTC patients (GBC, n = 4467, ECC, n = 2215), 1.6% received NAT; the utilization of NAT for EBTC increased over time (Ptrend = 0.03). Among patients with lymph node metastasis, the lymph node ratio was lower among patients with NAT (0.18 vs. 0.40, p < 0.01). After PSM, there was no difference in overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) among patients treated with NAT versus US (5-year OS: 24.0% vs. 24.6%, p = 0.14, 5-year CSS: 38.0% vs. 36.1%, p = 0.21). A subgroup analysis revealed that NAT was associated with improved OS and CSS among patients with stages III–IVA of the disease (OS: HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.46–0.92, p = 0.02, CSS: HR 0.62, 95%CI 0.41–0.92, p = 0.01). Conclusions: While NAT did not provide an overall benefit to patients undergoing surgery for EBTC, individuals with advanced-stage disease had improved OS and CSS with NAT. An individualized approach to NAT use among patients with EBTC may provide a survival benefit.

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.

Study on the thermal stability of nab-paclitaxel during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel), as a special targeted preparation of paclitaxel, has the advantages of good curative effect and less side effects in anti-tumor therapy. The existence of the plasma-peritoneal barrier and insufficient blood supply make intravenous drugs hard to reach the peritoneum, while hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy can solve the difficulty. And compared with systemic medications, HIPEC can also give higher concentrations of chemotherapy drugs in the abdominal cavity, while ensuring lower systemic toxicity. However, at present, there is no relevant report on the clinical study of nab-paclitaxel during intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy, and its stability under special temperature conditions has not been reported either.

METHODS

In this study, We examined three batches of albumin-bound paclitaxel dissolved in saline at different temperatures (25 °C, 37 °C, 41 °C, 42 °C and 43 °C) for the changes of human serum albumin content, human serum albumin polymer content, related substance content, in-vitro release rate, paclitaxel binding rate and paclitaxel content at different temperatures.

RESULTS

Our results demonstrated that the indicators including human serum albumin content, human serum albumin polymer content, in-vitro release rate, paclitaxel binding rate and paclitaxel content were stable to the several temperatures, except that Taxane (0.1%) and other individual impurities in the determination of related substance content fluctuated comparatively widely with the change of temperature. In addition, only Taxane (0.1%) and 7-Epitaxol (1%) were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, albumin-bound paclitaxel is relatively stable to different temperatures (25 °C, 37 °C, 41 °C, 42 °C and 43 °C). This study will lay a foundation for further studies on the albumin-bound paclitaxel during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Apatinib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced gastric carcinoma patients: a prospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Apatinib, a small molecule targeting VEGFR2, is commonly used for advanced gastric cancer treatment. This prospective cohort study further investigated the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant apatinib plus chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric carcinoma patients.

METHODS

Ninety-six locally advanced gastric carcinoma patients were divided into the apatinib plus chemotherapy group (N = 45) and chemotherapy group (N = 51) according to their chosen treatment. Apatinib was administered (375 mg/day), and S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) or oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (CapOx) was given as chemotherapy, for 3 cycles with 3 weeks a cycle before surgery.

RESULTS

The objective response rate (62.2% vs. 37.3%, P = 0.015) and pathological response grade (P = 0.011) were better; meanwhile, the tumor-resection rate (95.6% vs. 84.3%, P = 0.143) and pathological complete response rate (23.3% vs. 9.3%, P = 0.080) exhibited increasing trends (without statistical significance) in the apatinib plus chemotherapy group compared with the chemotherapy group. Additionally, the apatinib plus chemotherapy group achieved prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.019) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.047) compared with the chemotherapy group. After adjusted by multivariate Cox's regression analysis, neoadjuvant apatinib plus chemotherapy was still superior to chemotherapy regarding DFS (hazard ratio (HR): 0.277, P = 0.014) and OS (HR: 0.316, P = 0.038). Notably, the incidences of adverse events between the two groups were not different (P > 0.050). Moreover, the most common adverse events of neoadjuvant apatinib plus chemotherapy were leukopenia (42.2%), fatigue (37.8%), hypertension (37.8%), and anemia (31.1%).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant apatinib plus chemotherapy realizes better clinical response, pathological response, survival profile, and non-inferior safety profile compared to chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric carcinoma.

The Development of Peritoneal Metastasis from Gastric Cancer and Rationale of Treatment According to the Mechanism

In the present article, we describe the normal structure of the peritoneum and review the mechanisms of peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC). The structure of the peritoneum was studied by a double-enzyme staining method using alkaline-phosphatase and 5'-nucreotidase, scanning electron microscopy, and immunohistological methods. The fundamental structure consists of three layers, mesothelial cells and a basement membrane (layer 1), macula cribriformis (MC) (layer 2), and submesothelial connective tissue containing blood vessels and initial lymphatic vessels, attached to holes in the MC (layer 3). Macro molecules and macrophages migrate from mesothelial stomata to the initial lymphatic vessels through holes in the MC. These structures are characteristically found in the diaphragm, omentum, paracolic gutter, pelvic peritoneum, and falciform ligament. The first step of PM is spillage of cancer cells (peritoneal free cancer cells; PFCCs) into the peritoneal cavity from the serosal surface of the primary tumor or cancer cell contamination from lymphatic and blood vessels torn during surgical procedures. After PFCCs adhere to the peritoneal surface, PMs form by three processes, i.e., (1) trans-mesothelial metastasis, (2) trans-lymphatic metastasis, and (3) superficial growing metastasis. Because the intraperitoneal (IP) dose intensity is significantly higher when generated by IP chemotherapy than by systemic chemotherapy, IP chemotherapy has a great role in the treatment of PFCCs, superficial growing metastasis, trans-lymphatic metastasis and in the early stages of trans-mesothelial metastasis. However, an established trans-mesothelial metastasis has its own interstitial tissue and vasculature which generate high interstitial pressure. Accordingly, it is reasonable to treat established trans-mesothelial metastasis by bidirectional chemotherapy from both IP and systemic chemotherapy.

Association of tumor downstaging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with survival in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Assessing the downstaging effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LANPC) and predicting response to treatment remain challenging. The present study aimed to evaluate the long-term prognosis of downstaging after NACT in patients with LANPC and to investigate the prognostic value of post-NACT tumor downstaging on treatment outcomes in the era of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 226 patients with stage III (n = 188) and IVA (n = 38) NPC admitted to Haikou People's Hospital between 1 October 2009 and 1 October 2012. The patients were grouped as downstaging or no after NACT. Overall survival (OS), locoregional failure-free survival (LFFS), and distant failure-free survival (DFFS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 226 patients, 196 (86.7%) were in the downstaging group and 30 (13.3%) were in the non-downstaging group. The longest follow-up was 76 months, and the median was 45 months. The 3-year OS rates of the downstaging group and non-downstaging group were 91.0% (95% CI 0.89-0.93) and 69.5% (95% CI 0.66-0.72) (P = 0.005). The 5-year OS rates were 81.6% (95% CI 0.78-0.86) and 53.3% (95% CI 0.49-0.61) (P = 0.001). N downstaging (3-year OS, HR 0.491, 95% CI 0.221-0.881, P = 0.022; 5-year OS, HR = 0.597, 95% CI 0.378-0.878, P = 0.021) was independently associated with OS.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of LANPC, the patients with downstaging after NACT have a better prognosis than those without downstaging. This study suggests that NACT can improve the prognosis for patients with LANPC if there is downstaging.

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.

Advances with pharmacotherapy for peritoneal metastasis

INTRODUCTION

A new treatment strategy involving cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with perioperative intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy was proposed in 1999 by the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International, and the strategy is now justified as a state-of-the-art treatment to improve the long-term survival of patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). To achieve cure in the patients with PM, complete removal of macroscopic tumors and eradication of micrometastasis on the peritoneum, left after CRS are essential. Systemic chemotherapy is not indicated for the treatment of PM. In contrast, intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy brings about significantly higher locoregional dose intensity in the peritoneal cavity and subperitoneal tissues. In combination with anticancer drugs, hyperthermia enhances cytotoxicity against cancer cells.

AREA COVERED

This article provides a systematic overview of PM from various cancers including gastric, colorectal, small bowel, appendiceal cancer, and mesothelioma. It also includes all the essential aspects of therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

CRS plus perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy is safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality. It is justified as a standard treatment to improve the long-term survival of patients with PM and is now performed with curative intent for PM from various malignancies.

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.