Randomized clinical trial comparing octreotide and scopolamine butylbromide in symptom control of patients with inoperable bowel obstruction due to advanced ovarian cancer

Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Patients with Gynaecological Cancer: A Systematic Review

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to evaluate current surgical and non-surgical management strategies for malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) in patients with gynaecological cancer. Methods: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted across MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Scopus, without restrictions on language or publication date. Following the removal of duplicates, 4866 articles were screened, with 34 meeting the inclusion criteria. Results: Surgical intervention remains the definitive treatment for MBO, offering longer symptom-free periods and improved survival, particularly when conservative methods fail. However, the selection of surgical candidates is crucial due to the high risk of morbidity and the potential for significant complications. Non-surgical treatments, such as the use of Gastrografin, Octreotide, and Dexamethasone, along with invasive procedures like nasogastric tubing, percutaneous gastrostomy, and stent placement, offer varying degrees of symptom relief and are often considered when surgery is not feasible. Conclusions: In this article we provide a potential therapeutic algorithm for the management of patients with MBO. This review underscores the urgent need for high-quality research to develop clear, evidence-based guidelines for MBO management in patients with gynaecologic cancer. Establishing standardised protocols will improve patient outcomes by aiding clinicians in making informed, individualised treatment decisions.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for the research and assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction is experienced by 15% of people with advanced cancer, preventing them from eating and drinking and causing pain, nausea and vomiting. Surgery is not always appropriate. Management options include tube or stent drainage of intestinal contents and symptom control using medication. Published literature describing palliative interventions uses a broad range of outcome measures, few of which are patient-relevant. This hinders evidence synthesis, and fails to consider the perspectives of people undergoing treatment.

AIMS

To develop a Core Outcome Set for the assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction with clinician, patient and caregiver involvement, using COMET methodology (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials).

METHODS

A systematic review of clinical trials and observational studies, a rapid review of the qualitative literature and in-depth patient and clinician interviews were conducted to identify a comprehensive list of outcomes. Outcomes were compared and consolidated by the study Steering Group and Patient and Public Involvement contributors, and presented to an international clinical Expert Panel for review. Outcomes from the finalised list were rated for importance in a three-round international Delphi process: results of two survey rounds were circulated to respondents, and two separate consensus meetings were conducted with clinicians and with patients and caregivers via virtual conferencing, using live polling to reach agreement on a Core Outcome Set.

RESULTS

130 unique outcomes were identified. Following the independent Expert Panel review, 82 outcomes were taken into round 1 of the Delphi survey; 24 outcomes reached criteria for critical importance across all stakeholder groups and none reached criteria for dropping. All outcomes rated critically important were taken forward for re-rating in round 2 and all other outcomes dropped. In round 2, all outcomes were voted critically important by at least one stakeholder group. Round 2 outcomes were presented again at online consensus meetings, categorised as high ranking (n = 9), middle ranking (n = 7) or low ranking (n = 8). Stakeholders reached agreement on 16 core outcomes across four key domains: Symptom control, Life impact, Treatment outcomes, and Communication and patient preferences.

CONCLUSION

Use of this Core Outcome Set can help to address current challenges in making sense of the evidence around treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction to date, and underpin a more robust future approach. Clearer communication and an honest understanding between all stakeholders will help to provide a basis for responsible decision-making in this distressing situation in clinical practice.

The range and suitability of outcome measures used in the assessment of palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction, a complication of certain advanced cancers, causes severe symptoms which profoundly affect quality of life. Clinical management remains complex, and outcome assessment is inconsistent.

AIM

To identify outcomes evaluating palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction, as part of a four-phase study developing a core outcome set.

DESIGN

The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019150648). Eligible studies included at least one subgroup with obstruction below the ligament of Treitz undergoing palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Study quality was not assessed because the review does not evaluate efficacy.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Database, CINAHL, PSYCinfo Caresearch, Open Grey and BASE were searched for trials and observational studies in October 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 4769 studies were screened, 290 full texts retrieved and 80 (13,898 participants) included in a narrative synthesis; 343 outcomes were extracted verbatim and pooled into 90 unique terms across six domains: physiological, nutrition, life impact, resource use, mortality and survival. Prevalent outcomes included adverse events (78% of studies), survival (54%), symptom control (39%) and mortality (31%). Key individual symptoms assessed were vomiting (41% of studies), nausea (34%) and pain (33%); 19% of studies assessed quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment focuses on survival, complications and overall symptom control. There is a need for definitions of treatment 'success' that are meaningful to patients, a more consistent approach to symptom assessment, and greater consideration of how to measure wellbeing in this population.

Symptom burden and lived experiences of patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals on the management of malignant bowel obstruction: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction occurs in up to 50% of people with advanced ovarian and 15% of people with gastrointestinal cancers. Evaluation and comparison of interventions to manage symptoms are hampered by inconsistent evaluations of efficacy and lack of agreed core outcomes. The patient perspective is rarely incorporated.

AIM

To synthesise the qualitative data regarding patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals' views and experience of malignant bowel obstruction to inform the development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of malignant bowel obstruction.

DESIGN

A qualitative systematic review was conducted, with narrative synthesis. The review protocol was registered prospectively (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, CRD42020176393).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2021. Reference lists were screened for further relevant publications, and citation tracking was performed.

RESULTS

Nine papers were included, reporting on seven studies which described the views and experiences of malignant bowel obstruction through the perspectives of 75 patients, 13 caregivers and 62 healthcare professionals. Themes across the papers included symptom burden, diverse experiences of interventions, impact on patient quality of life, implications and trajectory of malignant bowel obstruction, mixed experience of communication and the importance of realistic goals of care.

CONCLUSION

Some of the most devastating sequelae of malignant bowel obstruction, such as pain and psychological distress, are not included routinely in its clinical or research evaluation. These data will contribute to a wider body of work to ensure the patient and caregiver perspective is recognised in the development of a core outcome set.

MASCC multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for the management of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced cancer

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) for patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) MBO study group conducted a systematic review of databases (inception to March 2021) to identify studies about patients with advanced cancer and MBO that reported on the following outcomes: symptom management, bowel obstruction resolution, prognosis, overall survival, and quality of life. The review was restricted to studies published in English, but no restrictions were placed on publication year, country, and study type. As per the MASCC Guidelines Policy, the findings were synthesized to determine the levels of evidence to support each MBO intervention and, ultimately, the graded recommendations and suggestions.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 17,656 published studies and 397 selected for the guidelines. The MASCC study group developed a total of 25 evidence-based suggestions and recommendations about the management of MBO-related nausea and vomiting, bowel movements, pain, inflammation, bowel decompression, and nutrition. Expert consensus-based guidance about advanced care planning and psychosocial support is also provided.

CONCLUSION

This MASCC Guideline provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations about MBO management for patients with advanced cancer.

Non-Surgical Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Advanced Ovarian Cancer patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

Malignant bowel obstruction is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Many patients aren’t suitable for, or decline, surgical decompression. The outcomes for this frail group of patients are not well characterized.

Aim:

To evaluate survival outcomes of ovarian cancer patients who undergo non-surgical management of malignant bowel obstruction.

Design:

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Sources:

Online literature search of Pubmed, Embase and Medline libraries up until December 2020. Searching abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of included studies and contacting experts in the field.

Selection Criteria:

Studies that investigated non-surgical management of confirmed bowel obstruction in advanced ovarian cancer patients were included. All levels of evidence including RCTs, cohort studies and case-series if they included greater than 5 patients.

Data Collection and Analysis:

The studies were independently chosen by two reviewers who extracted and analyzed the data separately through OpenMeta Analyst software. Study quality was assessed using the JADAD score and the Newcastle Ottawa Score.

Results:

24 studies met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review and 9 for the meta-analysis. Median survival of patients managed non-surgically for bowel obstruction was 44 days (95% CI 38-49 days, I ² = 0%, P = 0.128).

Conclusion:

The quality of studies was relatively low, however the evidence shows that non-surgical management of bowel obstruction results in a short life expectancy but with controlled symptoms. Where quality of life is the main concern, this may be a feasible and effective strategy.

Medical management of malignant bowel obstruction in patients with advanced cancer: 2021 MASCC guideline update

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a frequent complication in patients with advanced cancer, particularly colon or gynecological malignancies. MASCC previously published a guideline for symptom management of MBO in 2017. This is a 5-year update.

METHOD

A systematic search and review of relevant literature includes a review published in 2010 and 2017. The guideline update used the same literature search process as followed in 2015. The dates of the new search included 2015 up to February 2, 2021. The guidelines involved the pharmacologic management of nausea and vomiting in malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) only. Only randomized trials were included in the updated guideline as evidence. The evidence was reviewed by the panel and the MASCC criteria for establishing a guideline were followed using MASCC level of grading and category of evidence.

RESULTS

There was one systematic review and 3 randomized trials accepted as evidence from 257 abstracts. Octreotide is effective in reducing gastrointestinal secretions and colic and thereby reduces nausea and vomiting caused by MBO. Scopolamine butylbromide is inferior to octreotide in the doses used in the comparison study. Olanzapine or metoclopramide may be effective in reducing nausea and vomiting secondary to partial bowel obstructions. The panel suggests using either drug. Additional studies are needed to clarify benefits. Haloperidol has been used by convention as an antiemetic but has not been subjected to a randomized comparison. Ranitidine plus dexamethasone may be effective in reducing nausea and vomiting from MBO but cannot be recommended until there is a comparison with octreotide.

DISCUSSION

Octreotide remains the drug of choice in managing MBO. Ranitidine was used in one randomized trial in all participants and so its effectiveness as a single drug is not known until there is a randomized comparison with octreotide. Antiemetics such as metoclopramide and olanzapine may be effective, but we have very few randomized trials of antiemetics in MBO.

CONCLUSION

The panel recommends octreotide in non-operable MBO. Randomized trials are needed to clarify ranitidine and antiemetic choices.

A Palliative Approach to Management of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis and Malignant Ascites

In addition to severe, life-limiting complications such as malignant bowel obstruction, fistulae, and malignant ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis frequently causes life-impacting symptoms such as pain, nausea, anorexia, cachexia, and fatigue. A variety of medical, interventional, and surgical therapies are now available for management of both complications and symptoms. Although surgery in this population is often associated with a relatively high risk of morbidity and mortality, operative intervention can offer effective palliative treatment in appropriately selected patients. Early involvement of palliative care specialists as part of a multidisciplinary team is essential to providing optimal, holistic care of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Medical Management of Inoperable Malignant Bowel Obstruction

OBJECTIVE

To review medical management of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review using PubMed and MEDLINE databases searching malignant bowel obstruction, etiology, types, pathophysiology, medical, antisecretory, anti-inflammatory, antiemetic drugs, analgesics, promotion of emptying, prevention of infection, anticholinergics, somatostatin analogs, gastric antisecretory drugs, prokinetic agents, glucocorticoid, opioid analgesics, antibiotics, enema, and adverse effects.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Randomized or observational studies, cohorts, case reports, or reviews written in English between 1983 and November 2020 were evaluated.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) commonly occurs in patients with advanced or recurrent malignancies and severely affects the quality of life and survival of patients. Its management remains complex and variable. Medical management is the cornerstone of MBO treatment, with the goal of reducing distressing symptoms and optimizing quality of life. Until now, there has been neither a standard clinical approach nor registered medications to treat patients with inoperable MBO.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

This review provides information on the etiology, type and pathophysiology, and medical treatment of MBO and related adverse reactions of the drugs commonly used, which can greatly assist clinicians in making clinical decisions when treating MBO.

CONCLUSIONS

Published research shows that medical management of MBO mainly consists of antisecretory, anti-inflammatory strategies, controlling vomiting and pain, promoting emptying, preventing infection, and combination therapy. Being knowledgeable about the most current treatment options, the related adverse effects, and the evidence supporting different practices is critical for clinicians to provide individualized medical therapy for MBO patients.

Management of primary and metastatic malignant small bowel obstruction, operate or palliate. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The management of patients presenting with malignant small bowel obstruction is a challenging paradigm. The aim of this systematic review was to examine different management strategies in these complex patients. The primary outcomes evaluated were the type of intervention, 30-day morbidity and mortality and overall survival rates.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of EMBase, Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane Library was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for studies reporting on conservative and operative management of malignant small bowel obstruction.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (n = 882 patients) reporting on outcomes for malignant small bowel obstruction were analysed. Outcomes measured were primarily survival and relief of obstructive symptoms. The median age ranged from 52 to 66 years. The most common cause of malignant small bowel obstruction was gynaecological in nature (56%), followed by colorectal (19%). Four hundred and eighty-six patients underwent primary surgical management and the remaining 396 patients were assigned to non-surgical intervention. Median overall survival in the operative studies ranged from 2.5 to 7.4 months compared with 0.9 to 1.9 months (P < 0.05). The 30-day mortality ranged from 13% to 28% in those who underwent surgical interventions versus 2% to 61% in the non-surgical group (P = 0.09). No significant difference in median survival in gastrointestinal (GI) and gynaecological malignancies was observed (4.3 versus 5.0 months, P = 0.12). Morbidity ranged from 21% to 85% in the surgical group and 12% to 29% in the percutaneous groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Surgical intervention in malignant small bowel obstruction is associated with significant morbidity, although it may improve survival in selected patients with gynaecological and colorectal malignancy. It is imperative that realistic goals and expectations are discussed with patients preoperatively.

Development of a core outcome set to use in the research and assessment of malignant bowel obstruction: protocol for the RAMBO study

INTRODUCTION

Studies regarding the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) report conflicting findings. This is partly due to different outcome measures being used to evaluate severity of MBO and the response to treatments. Furthermore, current outcome measures focus mainly on measurable physiological parameters which may not correlate strongly with patient-defined quality of life. The development of core outcome sets allows a consistent approach to evaluating clinical conditions taking into consideration patient, healthcare professional and researcher viewpoints. It follows an internationally recognised standard methodology. We present a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for Research and Assessment of MBO (RAMBO).

METHODS

RAMBO is a multicentre study, comprising of four phases: a systematic review to examine current scope of outcome measures associated with MBO (phase I). Interviews with patients, companions and healthcare professionals will explore priorities and preferences for care and outcomes (phase II). An expert panel meeting will collate the findings into a set of outcomes (phase III), refined by consensus through a Delphi survey with key stakeholders (phase IV). The final set of outcomes will be ratified at a consensus meeting. Each step will actively include patient partners. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics will be used to analyse qualitative and quantitative data, respectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained (Wales REC 5, REF: 19/LO/1876). Study participants and relevant stakeholders will be updated with newsletters and a lay summary at the end of the study. Abstracts will be submitted to national and international conferences, result papers will be submitted to peer-reviewed, open access journals.

TRIAL AND PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBERS

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (1402); Systematic Literature Review (CRD42019150648); Rapid Review (CRD42020176393).

The Chicago Consensus on peritoneal surface malignancies: Palliative care considerations

The Chicago Consensus Working Group provides multidisciplinary recommendations for palliative care specifically related to peritoneal surface malignancies. These guidelines are developed with input from leading experts including surgical oncologists, medical oncologists, gynecologic oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, palliative care physicians, and pharmacists. These guidelines recognize and address the emerging need for increased awareness in the appropriate management of peritoneal surface disease. They are not intended to replace the quest for higher levels of evidence.

The Chicago Consensus on Peritoneal Surface Malignancies: Palliative Care Considerations

The Chicago Consensus Working Group provides multidisciplinary recommendations for palliative care specifically related to peritoneal surface malignancies. These guidelines are developed with input from leading experts including surgical oncologists, medical oncologists, gynecologic oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, palliative care physicians, and pharmacists. These guidelines recognize and address the emerging need for increased awareness in the appropriate management of peritoneal surface disease. They are not intended to replace the quest for higher levels of evidence.

Indian Society for Study of Pain, Cancer Pain Special Interest Group Guidelines on Pharmacological Management of Cancer Pain (Part II)

The Indian Society for Study of Pain (ISSP), Cancer Pain Special Interest Group (SIG) guidelines on pharmacological management of cancer pain in adults provide a structured, stepwise approach, which will help to improve the management of cancer pain and to provide the patients with a minimally acceptable quality of life. The guidelines have been developed based on the available literature and evidence, to suit the needs, patient population, and situations in India. A questionnaire, based on the key elements of each sub draft addressing certain inconclusive areas where evidence was lacking, was made available on the ISSP website and circulated by e-mail to all the ISSP and Indian Association of Palliative Care members. We recommend that analgesics for cancer pain management should follow the World Health Organization 3-step analgesic ladder appropriate for the severity of pain. The use of paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with opioids for mild-to-moderate pain should be used. For mild-to-moderate pain, weak opioids such as tramadol, tapentadol, and codeine can be given in combination with nonopioid analgesics. We recommend morphine as the opioid of the first choice for moderate-to-severe cancer pain. Sustained-release formulations can be started 12 hourly, once the effective 24 h dose with immediate-release morphine is established. Opioid switch or rotation should be considered if there is inadequate analgesia or intolerable side effects. For opioid-induced respiratory depression, μ receptor antagonists (e.g. naloxone) must be used promptly. Antidepressants and/or anticonvulsants should be used to treat neuropathic cancer pain, and the dose should be titrated according to the clinical response and side effects. External beam radiotherapy should be offered to all patients with painful metastatic bone pain. There is evidence on use of ketamine in cancer neuropathic pain, but with no beneficial effect, thus, it is not recommended.

Nausea and Vomiting: a Palliative Care Imperative

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review was undertaken to survey recent literature for research reports and comprehensive clinical reviews addressing the pharmacologic management of nausea and vomiting (N&V) in advanced cancer. The goal was to integrate findings in a comprehensive article that incorporates palliative care concepts into antiemetic treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are few published studies of N&V in advanced cancer; such research may be limited by the multicausal nature of N&V and participant burden to patients with life-limiting disease. Most articles are written by oncologists who also specialize in palliative care, and those addressing adverse effects of drugs used as antiemetics are found in other literature. Articles addressing more novel therapies, like cannabinoids and medical marijuana, are uncommon in the oncology literature. N&V in patients with progressive or advanced cancer is often multicausal. Nausea is more common and persistent, and even mild nausea is bothersome and may cause anxiety or depression. The mechanisms of nausea and vomiting overlap, but different neural pathways constitute the final pathway for each-the brainstem for vomiting and higher brain regions for nausea. Common causes of N&V in advanced cancer include constipation, opioids, and malignant bowel obstruction. About 40% have undetermined causes and may be exacerbated by impaired gastric emptying, chemical imbalances, or other factors. Several drugs that have antiemetic effects and act at different receptors are used to palliate N&V. There is a paucity of research that supports palliative antiemetic choices, and other research is needed to define potential therapeutic strategies that capitalize on differences between nausea and vomiting.

Intellectual Equipoise and Challenges: Accruing Patients With Advanced Cancer to a Trial Randomizing to Surgical or Nonsurgical Management (SWOG S1316)

BACKGROUND

Prospective, randomized trials are needed to determine optimal treatment approaches for palliative care problems such as malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). Randomization poses unique issues for such studies, especially with divergent treatment approaches and varying levels of equipoise. We report our experience accruing randomized patients to the Prospective Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Malignant Bowel Obstruction (SWOG S1316) study, comparing surgical and nonsurgical management of MBO.

METHODS

Patients with MBO who were surgical candidates and had treatment equipoise were accrued and offered randomization to surgical or nonsurgical management. Patients choosing nonrandomization were offered prospective observation. Trial details are listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT #02270450). An accrual algorithm was developed to enhance enrollment.

RESULTS

Accrual is ongoing with 176 patients enrolled. Most (89%) patients chose nonrandomization, opting for nonsurgical management. Of 25 sites that have accrued to this study, 6 enrolled patients on the randomization arm. Approximately 59% (20/34) of the randomization accrual goal has been achieved. Patient-related factors and clinician bias have been the most prevalent reasons for lack of randomization. An algorithm was developed from clinician experience to aid randomization. Using principles in this tool, repeated physician conversations discussing treatment options and goals of care, and a supportive team-approach has helped increase accrual.

CONCLUSIONS

Experience gained from the S1316 study can aid future palliative care trials. Although difficult, it is possible to randomize patients to palliative studies by giving clinicians clear recommendations utilizing an algorithm of conversation, allotment of necessary time to discuss the trial, and encouragement to overcome internal bias.

ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease

The development of guidelines is one of the core activities of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and European Society of Gynaecologial Oncology (ESGO), as part of the mission of both societies to improve the quality of care for patients with cancer across Europe. ESMO and ESGO jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations in several selected areas in order to improve the quality of care for women with ovarian cancer. The ESMO-ESGO consensus conference on ovarian cancer was held on April 12-14, 2018 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of ovarian cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel worked on five clinically relevant questions regarding ovarian cancer relating to each of the following four areas: pathology and molecular biology, early-stage and borderline tumours, advanced stage disease and recurrent disease. Relevant scientific literature, as identified using a systematic search, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. The recommendations presented here are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. This article presents the recommendations of this ESMO-ESGO consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease†

The development of guidelines recommendations is one of the core activities of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and European Society of Gynaecologial Oncology (ESGO), as part of the mission of both societies to improve the quality of care for patients with cancer across Europe. ESMO and ESGO jointly developed clinically relevant and evidence-based recommendations in several selected areas in order to improve the quality of care for women with ovarian cancer. The ESMO-ESGO consensus conference on ovarian cancer was held on 12-14 April 2018 in Milan, Italy, and comprised a multidisciplinary panel of 40 leading experts in the management of ovarian cancer. Before the conference, the expert panel worked on five clinically relevant questions regarding ovarian cancer relating to each of the following four areas: pathology and molecular biology, early-stage and borderline tumours, advanced stage disease and recurrent disease. Relevant scientific literature, as identified using a systematic search, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question and a consensus was reached. The recommendations presented here are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. This article presents the recommendations of this ESMO-ESGO consensus conference, together with a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation.

Small Bowel Obstruction

Identifying patients with small bowel obstruction who need operative intervention and those who will fail nonoperative management is a challenge. Without indications for urgent intervention, a computed tomography scan with/without intravenous contrast should be obtained to identify location, grade, and etiology of the obstruction. Most small bowel obstructions resolve with nonoperative management. Open and laparoscopic operative management are acceptable approaches. Malnutrition needs to be identified early and managed, especially if the patient is to undergo operative management. Confounding conditions include age greater than 65, post Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, inflammatory bowel disease, malignancy, virgin abdomen, pregnancy, hernia, and early postoperative state.

Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Advanced Gynecologic Cancers: An Updated Review from a Multidisciplinary Perspective

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a major complication in women with advanced gynecologic cancers which imposes a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems. Symptoms of MBO are challenging to palliate and result in progressive decompensation of already vulnerable patients with limited therapeutic options and a short prognosis. However, there is a paucity of guidelines or innovative approaches to improve the care of women who develop MBO. MBO is a complex clinical situation that requires a multidisciplinary approach to ensure the appropriate treatment modality and interprofessional care to optimally manage these patients. This review summarizes the current literature on the different approaches targeting MBO management including surgical intervention, chemotherapy, total parenteral nutrition, and pharmacological treatment. In addition, the impact of MBO management on patients' quality of life (QOL) is examined. This article focuses on the challenges in developing evidence-based treatment guidelines for MBO and barriers in clinical trial design for MBO and proposes strategies to advance the MBO management. Collaboration is essential to design studies that may improve the overall care and quality of life for these patients. Prospective data are needed to inform clinical practice, establish a new benchmark for evidence-based MBO management, and better understand the biology of MBO.

Palliative care in ovarian carcinoma patients-a personalized approach of a team work: a review

Most ovarian cancer patients are diagnosed in an advanced stage; and after the initial treatment experience disease recurrence, which eventually becomes palliative. Many questions arise in this setting including how to address patients in the palliative setting, how to discuss end-of-life issues, and how to manage symptoms. In this review, we discuss the timing and setting of end-of-life discussion in the context of end-stage ovarian cancer. We review the approach to relieving disease burden by improving and decreasing symptoms. These symptoms include recurrent ascites, bowel obstruction, pain, pulmonary effusion, and deep vein thrombosis.

恶性肠梗阻的治疗现状与进展

恶性肠梗阻(malignant bowel obstruction, MBO)是晚期肿瘤常见并发症之一, 严重影响患者的生活质量. 恶性肿瘤本身的复杂性导致肠梗阻治疗的复杂性、难治性. 近年来, 随着腹腔镜、内镜技术及介入技术的发展以及对姑息手术适应证的把握, 肠梗阻患者的生存质量及治疗率得以提高, 但尚存在一定争议, 且在药物治疗方面暂无显著进展. 另外, 中医药在该领域亦有较多研究, 显示出一定的效果, 但尚缺乏前瞻性的随机对照研究. 临床处理要充分考虑治疗可能带来的益处及风险, 慎重选择个性化的治疗方案. 本文对国内外近年来MBO的中西医诊疗进展进行系统综述, 以期对临床诊疗具有一定的指导意义.

Blueberries inhibit cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 activity in human epithelial ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer (OC) is the sixth and eighth leading cause of cancer mortality among women in developed and developing countries, respectively. Medical therapy is the main method for the treatment of OC. However, drug toxicity and the marked side effects of chemotherapy limit the usage and therapeutic results of the treatments. Therefore, the identification of multi-target agents with few side effects and high effectiveness is required. Traditional Chinese medicine has been used clinically to treat various types of cancer for thousands of years and is considered to possess multiple components and agents, which exert efficient therapeutic functions with few side effects. Although blueberries have previously been used to treat various types of cancer, the effect on OC and precise molecular mechanism of function of the fruit remains unknown. Cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 have been reported to be the biomarkers of OC. Blueberries may affect the progression of OC by affecting COX levels. To investigate the issue, COX-1 and COX-2 were overexpressed or silenced in ovarian cancer SKOV3 cells. The effect of blueberries on SKOV3 cell viability was determined by an MTT assay. Furthermore, a mouse model for OC was established. The results indicated that blueberries inhibited the proliferation of OC cells by downregulating the levels of COX-1 and COX-2. Blueberry (400 mg daily) consumption reduced tumor size significantly in mice with OC compared with the control without blueberry treatment (P<0.05). The results suggest that blueberries should be used to develop a potential non-pharmaceutical therapy for OC.

Somatostatin Analogues Compared With Placebo and Other Pharmacologic Agents in the Management of Symptoms of Inoperable Malignant Bowel Obstruction: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Somatostatin analogues are commonly used to relieve symptoms in malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) but are more expensive than other antisecretory agents.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence of effectiveness of somatostatin analogues compared with placebo and/or other pharmacologic agents in relieving vomiting in patients with inoperable MBO.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases were systematically searched; reference lists of relevant articles were hand searched. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used.

RESULTS

The search identified 420 unique studies. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria (six octreotide studies and one lanreotide); 220 people administered somatostatin analogues and 207 placebo or hyoscine butylbromide. Three RCTs compared a somatostatin analogue with placebo and four with hyoscine butylbromide. Two adequately powered multicenter RCTs with a low Cochrane risk of bias reported no significant difference between somatostatin analogues and placebo in their primary end points. Four RCTs with a high/unclear Cochrane risk of bias reported that somatostatin analogues were more effective than hyoscine butylbromide in reducing vomiting.

CONCLUSION

There is low-level evidence of benefit with somatostatin analogues in the symptomatic treatment of MBO. However, high-level evidence from trials with low risk of bias found no benefit of somatostatin analogues for their primary outcome. There is debate regarding the clinically relevant study end point for symptom control in MBO and when it should be measured. The role of somatostatin analogues in this clinical situation requires further adequately powered, well-designed trials with agreed clinically important end points and measures.

Outcome prognostic factors in inoperable malignant bowel obstruction

PURPOSE

Inoperable malignant bowel obstruction (MBO), a severe complication of peritoneal carcinomatosis, has a low desobstruction rate (30-40 %) and end-of-life decision-making is hampered by the lack of known prognostic factors. This study aimed to explore prognostic factors for desobstruction in MBO.

METHODS

All patients with inoperable MBO admitted in our large oncology hospital between 2010 and 2013 were treated following a clinical protocol based on antiemetics, steroids and two antisecretories, octreotide, and hyoscine butylbromide. Two prognostic factor analyses using logistic regressions were performed, one based on data from day 1 of admission and the other on data from day 8.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were included. Frequency of desobstruction was 48.9 %. In the analysis of prognostic factors on day 1, MBO episodes derived from functional physiopathologic mechanisms (vs. mechanic or mixed) were more prone to resolve (p < 0.001 corrected for multiple comparisons). Considering patients alive with persistent obstruction on day 8, a better clinical condition was the variable more associated with desobstruction, but without statistical significance after correction for multiple comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

A functional physiopathologic mechanism of MBO development may be an early prognostic factor for desobstruction. A high proportion of desobstruction was observed, suggesting that the combination of antisecretories with different mechanism of action warrants further investigation.