HIPEC and CRS in peritoneal metastatic gastric cancer - who really benefits?

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer with the presence of peritoneal metastases (pmgc) is associated with a very poor prognosis. Despite the wide utilization and promising results of the multimodal treatment regimens including cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and a subsequent hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), it is still not fully understood which patient group is suitable for this treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients (median age 53 years, range 39-71) were scheduled for three cycles of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy using bi-weekly FLOT-protocol followed by CRS + HIPEC. After this treatment 3 additional cycles of FLOT were given. During HIPEC Oxaliplatin was applied in a dosage of 200 mg/m² and Docetaxel in a dosage of 80 mg/m².

RESULTS

All patients underwent the standardized multimodal treatment including FLOT, CRS and HIPEC. This treatment resulted in an overall survival (OS) of 17 months in comparison to 6 months as the outcome of the classic treatments. Regression analysis demonstrated a Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) ≥ 12 as a negative factor for survival. Furthermore, we could see a worse prognosis by a higher temperature (>41,4 °C) of the chemotherapy used for the HIPEC. In consideration of the gender, the histomorphology and the Laurén-classification, we could develop a precise score to define the patient group which will benefit from this multimodal treatment with a prognosis improvement of 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy using the FLOT-protocol followed by CRS + HIPEC seems to be associated with prolonged OS in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer. This treatment needs a critical evaluation for patients with a PCI ≥12. Furthermore, the accurate selection of patients suffering of PMGC by using the developed score can improve the OS of up to 24 months for a suitable group and it can avoid the extensive treatment for unsuitable patients.

Selection of chemotherapy for hyperthermic intraperitoneal use in gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Several studies have shown the potential benefit of cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer patients. At present the most effective chemotherapeutic regime in HIPEC for gastric cancer is unknown. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of chemotherapeutic agents used for HIPEC in gastric cancer.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies on chemotherapy used for HIPEC in gastric cancer patients.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The chemotherapeutic regime of choice in HIPEC for gastric cancer has yet to be determined. The wide variety in studies and study parameters, such as chemotherapeutic agents, dosage, patient characteristics, temperature of perfusate, duration of perfusion, carrier solutions, intraperitoneal pressure and open or closed perfusion techniques, warrant more experimental and clinical studies to determine the optimal treatment schedule. A combination of drugs probably results in a more effective treatment.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with mitomycin C and 5-fluorouracil in patients at high risk of peritoneal metastasis from colorectal cancer: A preliminary clinical study

Although hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been extensively used to treat patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC), a standard protocol has not yet been established. The aim of this preliminary clinical study was to confirm in vitro the efficacy of mitomycin C combined with 5-fluorouracil (MMC-5FU) under hyperthermic conditions in CRC and investigate the pharmacokinetics and feasibility of HIPEC with MMC-5FU for patients at high risk of PM from CRC. To simulate HIPEC in vitro, we used the collagen gel droplet-embedded culture drug sensitivity test with the HCT166 colorectal cell line to assess the antitumor efficacy of MMC and 5FU as single-agent and combination treatments following incubation with HCT116 cells for 30 min at either 37 or 42°C. In addition, five patients at high risk of PM from CRC underwent surgical tumor resection followed by HIPEC with MMC-5FU. Our results demonstrated that the combined administration of MMC-5FU suppressed tumor cell proliferation more efficiently compared to either agent used alone. In addition, hyperthermia at 42°C significantly enhanced drug sensitivity. During the clinical application of HIPEC with MMC-5FU, no grade 4 hematological toxicities or surgical adverse events were recorded. In addition, there was no evidence of peritoneal recurrence during a median observational period of 38 months. Of note, two patients with positive intraoperative peritoneal cytology at the first surgery developed no peritoneal recurrence and exhibited negative peritoneal cytology at the second surgery. In conclusion, HIPEC using MMC-5FU was shown to be a feasible therapeutic option, with an acceptable toxicity profile, for patients at high risk of PM from CRC. Therefore, HIPEC with MMC-5FU may be a promising novel therapeutic option for such patients, which merits further verification of its safety and efficacy in large-scale clinical trials.