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

Short-Term Safety Evaluation of Albumin-Bound Paclitaxel in Intraoperative and Postoperative Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the short-term safety of albumin-bound paclitaxel in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) during and after gastric cancer (GC) surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of clinical data was conducted for GC surgery patients at Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, from January 2020 to September 2022. The study group (n = 120) received HIPEC and the control group (n = 268) did not receive albumin-bound paclitaxel. Short-term safety indicators including intraoperative complications, hematological toxicity, liver and kidney function, and gastrointestinal function recovery were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding intraoperative complications, hematological toxicity, liver and kidney function, and gastrointestinal function recovery time (P > 0.05 for all). In the study group, patients were further divided into subgroups based on dose and timing. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences among the different dose subgroups. However, when focusing on timing subgroups, the postoperative subgroup exhibited significantly higher white blood cell counts and bilirubin levels compared to the intraoperative subgroup, while the intraoperative subgroup had significantly higher bilirubin levels compared to both postoperative and intraoperative plus postoperative subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Albumin-bound paclitaxel demonstrates good safety and tolerability in HIPEC during and after GC surgery, without increasing the risk of intraoperative complications.

Prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin using hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal carcinomatosis significantly worsens the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer. Cytoreduction + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in advanced gastric cancer (AGC); however, its application remains controversial owing to the variability of the approaches used to perform it and the lack of high-quality evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the role of surgery and HIPEC in the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing surgery + HIPEC vs surgery + chemotherapy for the prophylaxis of peritoneal carcinomatosis and cytoreduction + HIPEC vs chemotherapy or other palliative options for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies enrolling 1641 patients were included. Surgery + HIPEC significantly improved overall survival in both prophylactic (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56) and therapeutic (HR, 0.57) settings. When surgery + HIPEC was performed with prophylactic intent, the pooled 3-year mortality rate was 32%, whereas for the control group it was 55%. The overall and peritoneal recurrence rates were also reduced (risk ratio [RR], 0.59 and 0.40, respectively). No significant difference was found in morbidity between groups (RR, 0.92).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current knowledge, HIPEC in AGC seems to be a safe and effective tool for prophylaxis and a promising resource for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Regarding the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis, the scarcity of large-cohort studies and the heterogeneity of the techniques adopted prevented us from achieving a definitive recommendation.

Hyperthermia inhibits the progression of gastric cancer by downregulating PLEK2/PD-L1 and possibly participates in immunomodulation

BACKGROUND

Hyperthermia is used as an adjunctive treatment for gastric cancer; however, the corresponding antitumor mechanism remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the expression of PLEK2 in gastric cancer and the mechanism by which hyperthermia inhibits gastric cancer progression and participating in immunomodulation.

METHODS

PLEK2 was screened by combining microarray analysis with gene knockdown and proliferation assays. Analysis based on the TCGA database, GEPIA website, and detection of clinical samples was employed to investigate the expression and correlation of PLEK2 and PD-L1. Knockdown of the expression PLEK2, subsequent experiments including western blotting, RT-qPCR, cell functional assays, and flow cytometry were used to assess the effects on cell migration, invasion, viability, and apoptosis. Intervention with hyperthermia to explore its effects. To evaluate the impact on immunity by detecting T cell proliferation and the release of IFNγ, activated T cells were co-cultured with the target cells.

RESULTS

Hyperthermia significantly reduced the expression of PLEK2 and PD-L1, while both were increased in gastric cancer. Knockdown of PLEK2 inhibited PD-L1 expression and significantly inhibited the proliferation, invasion, migration, and viability of gastric cancer cells. A decrease in PLEK2 expression promotes cell apoptosis. Although it cannot affect the proliferation of activated T cells, it can partially reverse IFNγ suppression.

CONCLUSION

PLEK2 plays a promoting role in gastric cancer, and hyperthermia downregulates PLEK2/PD-L1, which further inhibits cell proliferation, invasion, and migration, promotes cell apoptosis, and possibly participates in immune regulation.

Effect of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy on Cytoreductive Surgery in Gastric Cancer With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: The Phase III GASTRIPEC-I Trial

PURPOSE

In patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are still being debated. This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter phase III trial (EudraCT 2006-006088-22; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02158988) explored the impact on overall survival (OS) of HIPEC after CRS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with GC and histologically proven PM were randomly assigned (1:1) to perioperative chemotherapy and CRS alone (CRS-A) or CRS plus HIPEC (CRS + H). HIPEC comprised mitomycin C 15 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 in 5 L of saline perfused for 60 minutes at 42°C. The primary end point was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), other distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

Between March 2014 and June 2018, 105 patients were randomly assigned (53 patients to CRS-A and 52 patients to CRS + H). The trial stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. In 55 patients, treatment stopped before CRS mainly due to disease progression/death. Median OS was the same for both groups (CRS + H, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 8.7 to 17.7] months v CRS-A, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 7.0 to 19.4] months; P = .1647). The PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 7.0) in the CRS-A group and 7.1 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 10.5; P = .047) in the CRS + H group. The CRS + H group showed better MFS (10.2 months [95% CI, 7.7 to 14.7] v CRS-A, 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.8 to 11.5]; P = .0286). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups (CRS-A, 38.1% v CRS + H, 43.6%; P = .79).

CONCLUSION

This study showed no OS difference between CRS + H and CRS-A. PFS and MFS were significantly better in the CRS + H group, which needs further exploration. HIPEC did not increase AEs.

Anatomical Targeting of Anticancer Drugs to Solid Tumors Using Specific Administration Routes: Review

Despite remarkable recent progress in developing anti-cancer agents, outcomes of patients with solid tumors remain unsatisfactory. In general, anti-cancer drugs are systemically administered through peripheral veins and delivered throughout the body. The major problem with systemic chemotherapy is insufficient uptake of intravenous (IV) drugs by targeted tumor tissue. Although dose escalation and treatment intensification have been attempted in order to increase regional concentrations of anti-tumor drugs, these approaches have produced only marginal benefits in terms of patient outcomes, while often damaging healthy organs. To overcome this problem, local administration of anti-cancer agents can yield markedly higher drug concentrations in tumor tissue with less systemic toxicity. This strategy is most commonly used for liver and brain tumors, as well as pleural or peritoneal malignancies. Although the concept is theoretically reasonable, survival benefits are still limited. This review summarizes clinical results and problems and discusses future directions of regional cancer therapy with local administration of chemotherapeutants.

Current standards of surgical management of gastric cancer: an appraisal

PURPOSE

Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most common malignancy worldwide and portends a grim prognosis due to a lack of appreciable improvement in 5-year survival. We aimed to analyze the available literature and summarize the current standards of surgical care for curative and palliative intent treatment of GC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on the PubMed database for studies on the management of GC.

RESULTS

Endoscopic resection is an acceptable treatment option for T1a tumors. The role of optimal resection margin for GC remains unclear. D2 lymph node dissection remains the standard of care with splenectomy needed selectively for splenic hilum involvement. A distal pancreatic resection should be avoided. The advantage of bursectomy and omentectomy in GC surgery is not clear. Multi-visceral resection may be considered for locally advanced GC in carefully selected patients. Minimally invasive approaches are non-inferior to open surgery. Surgery should be abandoned prior even in metastatic GC within the frame of multimodal therapy approach.

CONCLUSION

Various trials have conclusively shown improved patient outcomes when well-established surgical standards are followed.

Temperature management during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

In addition to attaining complete or near complete cytoreduction, the instillation of select heated chemotherapeutic agents into the abdominal cavity has offered a chance for cure or longer survival inpatients with peritoneal surface malignancies. While the heating of chemotherapeutic agents enhances cytotoxicity, the resulting systemic hyperthermia has been associated with an increased risk of severe hyperthermia and its associated complications. Factors that have been associated with an increased risk of severe hyperthermia include intraoperative blood transfusions and longer perfusion duration. However, the development of severe hyperthermia still remains largely unpredictable. Thus, at several institutions, cooling protocols are employed during cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). Cooling protocols for CRS-HIPEC are not standardized and may be associated with episodes of severe hyperthermia or alternatively hypothermia. In theory, excessive cooling could result in a decreased effectiveness of the intraperitoneal chemotherapeutic agents. This presumption has been supported by a recent study of 214 adults undergoing CRS-HIPEC, where failure to attain a temperature of 38° C at the end of chemo-perfusion was associated with worse survival. Although not statistically significant, failure to maintain a temperature of 38° C for at least 30 minutes was associated with worse survival. Although studies are limited in this regard, the importance of maintaining a steady state of temperature during the hyperthermic phase of intraperitoneal chemotherapy administration cannot be disregarded. The following article describes the processes and physiological mechanisms responsible for hyperthermia during CRS-HIPEC. The challenges associated with temperature management during CRS-HIPEC and methods to avoid severe hypothermia and hyperthermia are also described.

[Peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric cancer : Treatment options for peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric cancer]

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is one of the most aggressive malignant diseases of the gastrointestinal tract with a high rate of metastasis. Peritoneal metastasis occurs in up to 60% of all patients and synchronously in up to 30% in locally advanced gastric cancer. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been an established treatment option in selected patients for several years, as the HIPEC serves as an alternative administration route.

OBJECTIVE

This article presents a schematic display of the various treatment options depending on the extent of peritoneal carcinomatosis in a gastric cancer.

METHODS

A literature search and analysis of the current literature on the treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases were carried out. A differentiation was made between limited and extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis together with the appropriate treatment strategy.

RESULTS

Principally, individual systemic chemotherapy is the backbone of treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. In selected patients and in cases of limited peritoneal carcinomatosis, CRS and HIPEC can be conducted and survival is improved; however, CRS is still contraindicated in cases of extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis and in exceptional cases pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) can be carried out.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients CRS and HIPEC can lead to an improvement with respect to overall and disease-free survival. In cases of extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis, individualized chemotherapy remains the major treatment option.

Initial Experience of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) in Baltic Country Center

Background: Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs) are a heterogenous group of primary and metastatic cancers affecting the peritoneum. They are associated with poor long-term outcomes. Many centers around the world adopt cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in routine clinical practice for these otherwise condemned patients despite a lack of high-level evidence from randomized control trials. This study aimed to investigate and present our 10-year experience with this controversial method, CRS and HIPEC, for PSM in a single tertiary center in a Baltic country. Methods: Patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC at Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos between 2011 and 2021 were included in this retrospective study. Overall survival was the primary study outcome. Secondary outcomes included postoperative morbidity and mortality, and local or systemic recurrence rates. Results: Sixty-nine patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC were included in the study. Most patients underwent treatment for peritoneal metastases from colorectal, ovarian, and appendiceal cancers. Six (8.7%) patients received CRS and HIPEC for primary peritoneal neoplasm—pseudomyxoma peritonei. The mean peritoneal carcinomatosis index score was 12 ± 7. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 62 (89.9%) patients. The mean OS was 39 ± 29 months. The mean survival of patients with PSMs of different origin was as follows: 39 ± 25 (95% CI: 28–50) months for colorectal cancer, 44 ± 31 (95% CI: 30–58) months for ovarian cancer, 32 ± 21 (95% CI: 21–43) months for appendiceal cancer, 422 ± 1 (95% CI: 12–97) months for pseudomyxoma peritonei, and 7 months for gastric cancer. Conclusions: The current study demonstrated the results of the CRS and HIPEC program in a single Baltic country tertiary center. Patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for PSMs achieved moderate survival rates with acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality risk.