Costs and clinical outcome of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy followed by cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer

Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Systemic Treatments for Advanced and Metastatic Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in the development of biomarker-directed therapy and immunotherapy, for advanced and metastatic gastric cancers, have the potential to improve survival and quality of life. Much attention has been directed towards second- and later-line treatments, and the landscape here is evolving rapidly. However, uncertainty in relative effectiveness, high costs and uncertainty in cost effectiveness represent challenges for decision makers.

OBJECTIVE

To identify economic evaluations for the second-line or later-line treatment of advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. Also, to assess key criteria (including model assumptions, inputs and outcomes), reporting completeness and methodological quality to inform future cost-effectiveness evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (from database inception to 5 March 2023) of EconLit via EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library (restricted to National Health Service [NHS] Economic Evaluation Database and Health Technology Assessment [HTA] Database), Embase, MEDLINE and of grey literature was conducted. This aimed to identify systemic treatments that align with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines. Data were collected on key criteria and on reporting completeness and methodological quality. A narrative synthesis focussed on cost-effectiveness and cost-of-illness studies. Outcomes of interest included total and incremental costs and outcomes (life-years and quality-adjusted life-years), ratios of incremental costs per unit outcome and other summary cost and outcome measures. Also, for cost-effectiveness studies, reporting completeness and the methodological quality were assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and the Philips Checklist, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 19 eligible economic evaluations were identified (cost-effectiveness studies [n = 15] and cost-of-illness studies [n = 4]). There was a general lack of consistency in the methodological approaches taken across studies. In the main, the cost-effectiveness studies indicated that the intervention under consideration was more effective and more costly than the comparator(s). However, most interventions were not cost effective. No studies were fully compliant with reporting-completeness and methodological-quality requirements. Given the lack of consistency in the approaches taken across cost-of-illness studies, outcomes could not be directly compared.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first published systematic literature review that has qualitatively synthesised economic evaluations for advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. There were differences in the approaches taken across the cost-effectiveness studies and the cost-of-illness studies. The conclusions of most of the cost-effectiveness studies were consistent despite identified differences in approaches. In the main, the interventions under consideration were not cost effective, presenting challenges to sustainability and affordability. We highlight a requirement for cost-effectiveness evaluations and for second-line or later-line treatments of advanced and metastatic gastric cancer that consider all relevant comparators and that are compliant with reporting-completeness and methodological-quality requirements. By addressing the methodological gaps identified here, future healthcare decision-making, within the context of this rapidly changing treatment landscape, would be better informed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023405951.

Current Evidence for the Use of HIPEC and Cytoreductive Surgery in Gastric Cancer Metastatic to the Peritoneum

Gastric cancer (GCa) is an aggressive malignancy, representing the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. The poor prognosis of GCa can be associated with the prevalence of peritoneal metastasis (PM). Current international and national GCa treatment guidelines only recommend palliative treatment options for patients with PM. Since the 1980s there have been multiple single arm trials, randomized controlled trials, and metanalysis investigating the use of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with advanced GCa, with or without PM. Results from these studies have been encouraging, with some large-volume centers even incorporating HIPEC into their treatment algorithms for patients with advanced GCa. Additionally, there are several ongoing trials that, when completed, will increase our understanding of the efficacy of CRS & HIPEC in patients with GCa metastatic to the peritoneum. Herein we review the current evidence, ongoing trials, consensus guidelines, and future considerations regarding the use of CRS & HIPEC in patients suffering from GCa with PM.

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

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

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) Combined with Surgery: A 12-Year Meta-Analysis of this Promising Treatment Strategy for Advanced Gastric Cancer at Different Stages

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was designed to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) combined with surgery for different stages of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) during the last 12 years.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched online, and papers were retrieved from other sources. Next, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality nonrandomized controlled trials (NRCTs) were selected for this analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan5.4 software.

RESULT

The 10 RCTs and 13 NRCTs selected for the study included 1892 patients. The overall survival rates were higher in the HIPEC group at 1 year (risk ratio [RR], 0.52; P = 0.004) and 3 years (RR, 0.63; P < 0.00001) than in the control group for the patients without peritoneal cancer, and the HIPEC group had a significant reduction in the recurrence rate (RR, 0.60; p < 0.00001). Among the patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), the HIPEC group had significantly higher overall survival rates at 1 year (RR, 0.62; P = 0.00001), 2 years (RR, 0.85; P = 0.002), and 3 years (RR, 0.87; P = 0.0001), with an increase in the overall median survival time of 4.67 months. The two groups showed no statistically significant difference in terms of complications for patients with PC (RR, 1.03; P = 0.93) or without PC (RR, 1.15; P = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

For local AGC without PC, standard surgery combined with prophylactic HIPEC could prolong survival and reduce the recurrence rate without more complications. The prognosis of this treatment strategy for patients with PC is closely related to patient selection. Complete cytoreduction combined with therapeutic HIPEC could prolong survival.

Cost Effectiveness of Interval Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Stage III Ovarian Cancer on the Basis of a Randomized Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

In the randomized open-label phase III OVHIPEC trial, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improved recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with stage III ovarian cancer. We studied the cost effectiveness of the addition of HIPEC to interval CRS in patients with ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We constructed a Markov health-state transition model to measure costs and clinical outcomes. Transition probabilities were derived from the OVHIPEC trial by fitting survival distributions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was calculated from a Dutch societal perspective, with a time horizon of 10 years. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the decision uncertainty.

RESULTS

Total health care costs were €70,046 (95% credibility interval [CrI], €64,016 to €76,661) for interval CRS compared with €85,791 (95% CrI, €78,766 to €93,935) for interval CRS plus HIPEC. The mean QALY in the interval CRS group was 2.12 (95% CrI, 1.66 to 2.64 QALYs) and 2.68 (95% CrI, 2.11 to 3.28 QALYs) in the interval CRS plus HIPEC group. The ICER amounted to €28,299/QALY. In univariable sensitivity analysis, the utility of recurrence-free survival and the number of days in the hospital affected the calculated ICER most.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the trial data, treatment with interval CRS and HIPEC in patients with stage III ovarian cancer was accompanied by a substantial gain in QALYs. The ICER is below the willingness-to-pay threshold in the Netherlands, indicating interval CRS and HIPEC is cost effective for this patient population. These results lend additional support for reimbursing the costs of treating these patients with interval CRS and HIPEC in countries with comparable health care systems.

Targeted literature review of the global burden of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction cancers (GEJCs) are the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Although several studies have evaluated the epidemiology and management of GC and GEJC, to our knowledge, no global estimates of the economic burden of GC and GEJC have yet been reported. This targeted literature review was conducted to summarise the epidemiology and management of GC and GEJC and to estimate its global economic and humanistic burden. The incidence of GC and GEJC is highest in Eastern Asia, several South and Central American countries and Central and Eastern Europe and lowest in North America and Africa. Prognosis is generally poor; the global 5-year survival rate is 5%-10% in advanced stages. Patients with GC and GEJC have more severe symptoms compared with patients with other cancers, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) worsens as the disease progresses. Given the rapid progression of GC and GEJC at advanced stages, chemotherapy, despite its toxicity, improves HRQoL compared with best supportive care. The costs of GC/GEJC are generally higher than for other cancers; in the US, the average annual cost per patient between 1998 and 2003 was 46,501 USD, compared with 29,609 USD and 35,672 USD for colorectal and lung cancer, respectively. Based on the 2012 incidence data and average costs per patient, estimates of the annual financial burden of GC and GEJC revealed great regional differences. Japan and Iran had the highest (8,492 million USD) and lowest (27 million USD) costs for 2017, respectively, while the estimate for the US was 3,171 million USD. The overall annual cost of GC and GEJC estimated for 2017 in a geographic area including Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK), Asia (Iran, Japan and China), North America (Canada and the US) and Australia was 20.6 billion USD.

The 30-year experience-A meta-analysis of randomised and high-quality non-randomised studies of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of gastric cancer

IMPORTANCE

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been used within various multimodality strategies for the prevention and treatment of gastric cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the role of HIPEC in gastric cancer and clarify its effectiveness at different stages of peritoneal disease progression.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Embase databases between January 1, 1985 and June 1, 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised control trials and high-quality non-randomised control trials selected on a validated tool (methodological index for non-randomised studies) comparing HIPEC and standard oncological management for the treatment of advanced stage gastric cancer with and without peritoneal carcinomatosis were considered.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

A random-effects network meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were overall survival and disease recurrence. Secondary outcomes were overall complications, type of complications, and sites of recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs and 21 non-randomised control trials (2520 patients) were included. For patients without the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), the overall survival rates between the HIPEC and control groups at 3 or 5 years resulted in favour of the HIPEC group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.82, P = 0.01). No difference in the 3-year overall survival (RR = 0.99, P = 0.85) in but a prolonged median survival of 4 months in favour of the HIPEC group (WMD = 4.04, P < 0.001) was seen in patients with PC. HIPEC was associated with significantly higher risk of complications for both patients with PC (RR = 2.15, P < 0.01) and without (RR = 2.17, P < 0.01). This increased risk in the HIPEC group was related to systemic drugs toxicity. Anastomotic leakage rates were found to be similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates a survival advantage of the use of HIPEC as a prophylactic strategy and suggests that patients whose disease burden is limited to positive cytology and limited nodal involvement may benefit the most from HIPEC. For patients with extensive carcinomatosis, the completeness of cytoreductive surgery is a critical prognostic factor for survival. Future RCTs should better define patient selection criteria.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis

Although gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis is associated with poor prognosis and is generally treated with palliative systemic therapy, recent studies have shown that cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may prove to be an efficacious treatment option. In addition to reviewing the natural history of gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis, this mini-review examines literature on the efficacy of CRS and HIPEC as compared to chemotherapy and surgical options. Both randomized and non-randomized studies were summarized with the emphasis focused on overall survival. In summary, CRS and HIPEC are indeed a promising treatment option for gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis and large randomized clinical trials are warranted.

Multimodality treatment strategies have changed prognosis of peritoneal metastases

For a long time, treatment of peritoneal metastases (PM) was mostly palliative and thus, this status was link with “terminal status/despair”. The current multimodal treatment strategy, consisting of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), has been strenuously achieved over time, but seems to be the best treatment option for PM patients. As we reviewed the literature data, we could emphasize some milestones and also, controversies in the history of proposed multimodal treatment and thus, outline the philosophy of this approach, which seems to be an unusual one indeed. Initially marked by nihilism and fear, but benefiting from a remarkable joint effort of human and material resources (multi-center and -institutional research), over a period of 30 years, CRS and HIPEC found their place in the treatment of PM. The next 4 years were dedicated to the refinement of the multimodal treatment, by launching research pathways. In selected patients, with requires training, it demonstrated a significant survival results (similar to the Hepatic Metastases treatment), with acceptable risks and costs. The main debates regarding CRS and HIPEC treatment were based on the oncologists’ perspective and the small number of randomized clinical trials. It is important to statement the PM patient has the right to be informed of the existence of CRS and HIPEC, as a real treatment resource, the decision being made by multidisciplinary teams.

Association between hospital finances, payer mix, and complications after hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: deficiencies in the current healthcare reimbursement system and future implications

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing implementation of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), there are little data on its financial implications. We analyzed hospital cost and reimbursement data within the context of insurance provider type and postoperative complications.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic variables, hospital costs, and reimbursement for all patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC at a single institution from 2009 to 2013 were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients underwent CRS/HIPEC. Median PCI score was 19, and average operative time was 550 min. Tumor histology included appendiceal (n = 40; 62 %), colorectal (n = 16; 25 %), goblet cell (n = 5; 8 %), and mesothelioma (n = 3; 5 %). Median length-of-stay was 13 days. Complications occurred in 42 patients (66 %), including 13 (20 %) with major (Clavien grade III-IV) complications. Payer mix included 42 private insurance and 22 Medicare/Medicaid. Financial data was available for 56 patients: average total hospital cost was $49,248 and reimbursement was $63,771, for a hospital profit of $14,523/patient. Despite similar costs between Medicare/Medicaid and private-insurance patients, Medicare/Medicaid reimbursed much less ($30,713 vs $80,747; p < 0.001), resulting in a net loss of $17,342 per patient. For private-insured patients, major complications were associated with increased cost and increased reimbursement, resulting in a net profit of $36,285, compared with a net loss of $54,274 in Medicare/Medicaid patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CRS/HIPEC is profitable in privately insured patients, even for those with major complications, but loses money in patients with Medicare/Medicaid. Under a future bundled-reimbursement system, complications will be negatively associated with profit. With these impending changes, hospitals must place emphasis on value, recalculate the reimbursement necessary for financial viability, and focus on decreasing costs and minimizing complications.

Impact of maximal cytoreductive surgery plus regional heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on outcome of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin: results of the GYMSSA trial

BACKGROUND

A prospective randomized trial was conducted to compare the impact of systemic chemotherapy versus multi-modality therapy (complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and systemic chemotherapy) on overall survival (OS) in patients with gastric carcinomatosis.

METHODS

Patients with measurable metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma involving the peritoneum, and resectable to "no evidence of disease" were randomized to gastrectomy, metastasectomy, HIPEC, and systemic FOLFOXIRI (GYMS arm) or FOLFOXIRI alone (SA arm).

RESULTS

Seventeen patients were enrolled (16 evaluable); 7 of 9 patients in the multi-modality GYMS arm achieved complete cytoreduction (CCR0). Median OS was 11.3 months in the GYMS arm and 4.3 months in the SA arm. Four patients in the GYMS arm survived >12 months, 2 patients close to 2 years at last follow-up, and 1 patient more than 4 years, with 2 of these patients still alive. No patient in the SA arm lived beyond 11 months. All patients surviving beyond 12 months in the surgery arm achieved complete cytoreduction and had an initial Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) of ≤ 15.

CONCLUSION

Maximal cytoreductive surgery combined with regional (HIPEC) and systemic chemotherapy in selected patients with gastric carcinomatosis and limited disease burden can achieve prolonged survival.

Initial clinical experience with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in signet-ring cell gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases

Purpose

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been shown to improve survival in select patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases. It remains unclear, however, whether this multimodal treatment protocol is also beneficial for signet-ring cell gastric cancer (SRC) patients with peritoneal metastases.

Materials and Methods

Clinical data of patients scheduled for upfront systemic chemotherapy consisting of 5-FU (2,600 mg/m²), folinic acid (200 mg/m²), docetaxel (50 mg/m²), and oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²) followed by CRS and HIPEC using cisplatin (50 mg/m²) at the Comprehensive Cancer Center, University Hospital Tübingen, Germany were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Eighteen consecutive patients for whom irresectability has been ruled out by a computed tomography scan were enrolled. However, complete cytoreduction could only be achieved in 72% of patients. When categorizing patients with respect to the completeness of cytoreduction, we found no difference between both groups considering tumor- or patient-related factors. The overall complication rate following complete cytoreduction and HIPEC was 46%. Within a median follow-up of 6.6 (0.5~31) months, the median survival for CRS and HIPEC patients was 8.9 months as opposed to 1.1 months for patients where complete cytoreduction could not be achieved. Following complete cytoreduction and HIPEC, progression-free survival was 6.2 months.

Conclusions

In SRC with peritoneal metastases, the prognosis appears to remain poor irrespective of complete CRS and HIPEC. Moreover, complete cytoreduction could not be achieved in a considerable percentage of patients. In SRC, CRS and HIPEC should be restricted to highly selective patients in order to avoid exploratory laparotomy.

Helicobacter pylori: gastric cancer and extragastric intestinal malignancies

The greatest challenge in Helicobacter pylori-related diseases continues to remain prevention of gastric cancer. New evidence supports the beneficial effect of H. pylori eradication not only on prevention of gastric cancer but also on the regression of preneoplastic conditions of the gastric mucosa. Concerning early detection of gastric cancer there are still no adequate means and there is urgent need to define appropriate markers, for example, by genome-wide research approaches. Currently, the best available method is the "serologic" biopsy based on pepsinogen I and the pepsinogen I/II ratio for identification of patients with severe gastric atrophy at increased risk for gastric cancer development. The treatment of early gastric cancer by endoscopic techniques can be performed safely and efficiently, but patients need meticulous follow-up for detection of metachronous lesions. In case of advanced disease, laparoscopically assisted surgical procedures are safe and favorable compared to open surgery. Two phase III trials support the role of adjuvant systemic treatment with different regimens. Unfortunately, there is still only slow progress in the development of palliative treatment regimens or modification of the existing therapy protocols. There is accumulating evidence for a role of H. pylori infection also in colorectal carcinogenesis. Seropositive individuals are at higher risk for the development of colorectal adenomas and consequently adenocarcinomas of this anatomical region. This phenomenon can partly be attributed to the increase of serum gastrin as response to atrophic changes of the gastric mucosa.