Gastrointestinal perforation associated with bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk factors for gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving bevacizumab.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 217 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab to investigate the risk factors for gastrointestinal perforation. Three patients occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab. We analyzed the clinical characteristics of three patients with intestinal perforation.

RESULTS

All patients receiving bevacizumab. Three of 217 patients occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab. Patient no. 1 was 70 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation and ultimately died after receiving bevacizumab. Patient no. 2 was 59 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab, and recovered smoothly after symptomatic treatment. Patient no. 3 was 60 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation and ultimately died after receiving bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab are at risk of gastrointestinal perforation. The patient's age, gender and history of bowel obstruction may be associated with gastrointestinal perforation.

Association of Intrapartum Drugs with Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation: A Single-Center Retrospective Review

OBJECTIVE

 Spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) occurs commonly in extremely low gestational age newborns (ELGANs; <30 weeks' GA). Early, concurrent neonatal use of indomethacin (Neo_IN) and hydrocortisone (Neo_HC) is a known risk for SIP. Mothers in premature labor often receive indomethacin (Mat_IN) for tocolysis and steroids (Mat_S) for fetal maturation. Coincidentally, ELGANs may receive Neo_IN or Neo_HC within the first week of life. There are limited data on the effect of combined exposures to maternal and neonatal medications. We hypothesized that proximity exposure to these medications may increase the risk of SIP.

STUDY DESIGN

 We reviewed the medical records of ELGANs from June 2014 to December 2019 at a single level III neonatal intensive care unit. We compared antenatal and postnatal indomethacin and steroid use between neonates with and without SIP. For analysis, chi-square, Student's t-test, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used.

RESULTS

 Among 417 ELGANs, SIP was diagnosed in 23, predominantly in neonates < 26 weeks' GA (n = 21/126, 16.7%). Risk factors analysis focused on this GA cohort in which SIP was most prevalent. Mat_IN administration within 2 days of delivery increased SIP risk (odds ratio: 3; 95% confidence interval: 1.25-7.94; p = 0.036). Neo_HC was not independently associated with SIP (p = 0.38). A higher proportion of SIP group had close temporal exposure of Mat_IN and Neo_HC compared with the non-SIP group, though not statistically significant (14 vs. 7%, p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

 Peripartum Mat_IN was associated with increased risk for SIP in this small study sample. Larger studies are needed to further delineate SIP risk from the interaction of peripartum maternal medication with early postnatal therapies and disease pathophysiology.

KEY POINTS

· Perinatal indomethacin is associated with SIP in preterm infants born at less than 26 weeks.. · Temporal proximity of prenatal/postnatal medication exposure matters.. · Indomethacin and Hydrocortisone the risks, benefits, and timing related to SIP..

Risk factors and epidemiology of spontaneous intestinal perforation among infants born at 22-24 weeks' gestational age

OBJECTIVE

To describe the epidemiology, risk factors, and timing of spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) among infants born at 22-24 weeks' gestational age (GA).

STUDY DESIGN

Observational cohort study among infants born at 22-24 weeks' GA in 446 neonatal intensive care units.

RESULTS

We identified 9712 infants, of whom 379 (3.9%) developed SIP. SIP incidence increased with decreasing GA (P < 0.001). Antenatal magnesium (odds ratio (OR) 1.42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.85), antenatal indomethacin (OR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.06-1.85), postnatal indomethacin (OR 1.61; 95% CI, 1.23-2.11), and postnatal hydrocortisone exposure (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.50-2.73) were associated with SIP. Infants who lost 15-20% (OR 1.77; 95% CI, 1.28-2.44) or >20% (OR 2.04; 95% CI, 1.46-2.85) of birth weight had higher odds of SIP than infants with weight loss <10%.

CONCLUSIONS

Antenatal magnesium exposure, antenatal indomethacin exposure, postnatal hydrocortisone exposure, postnatal indomethacin exposure, and weight loss ≥15% were associated with SIP.

Prophylactic indomethacin, antenatal betamethasone, and the risk of intestinal perforation in infants <28 weeks' gestation

OBJECTIVE

To determine if intestinal perforations before 14 days (either spontaneous (SIP) or necrotizing enterocolitis-induced) are increased when infants who received antenatal betamethasone shortly before birth are treated with prophylactic indomethacin (PINDO).

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study of 475 infants <28 week's gestation assigned to either a PINDO-protocol (n = 231) or expectant management protocol (n = 244) during consecutive protocol epochs.

RESULTS

Intestinal perforations before 14 days occurred in 33/475 (7%). In unadjusted and adjusted models, we found no associations between PINDO-protocol and intestinal perforations. PINDO-protocol did not increase intestinal perforations or SIP-alone even when given to infants who received betamethasone <7 or <2 days before delivery. 213/231 (92%) PINDO-protocol infants actually received indomethacin. The results were unchanged when examined just in those who received indomethacin.

CONCLUSION

In our study, early intestinal perforations and SIP-alone were not increased when PINDO was used by protocol in infants who received antenatal betamethasone shortly before birth.

Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with bowel perforation after immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure

PURPOSE

Exposure to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can predispose to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) involving the gastrointestinal tract. The association between ICIs and bowel perforation has not been well studied. We aimed to describe the clinical course, complications, treatment, and outcomes of patients experiencing bowel perforation during or after ICI treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center study included adult cancer patients with bowel perforation that occurred between the first dose of ICI treatment and up to 1 year thereafter between 1/1/2010 and 4/30/2021. Patients' clinical course, imaging, treatment, and outcomes related to bowel perforation were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 13,991 patients who received ICIs during the study period, 90 (0.6%) met the inclusion criteria. A majority were male (54.4%), the most common cancer type was melanoma (23.3%), and most patients had received PD-1/L1 inhibitor treatment (58.8%). Onset of perforation occurred after a median of four ICI treatment cycles. The most common symptom was abdominal pain (95.5%). The colon was the most common location for the perforation (37.7%). Evidence of diverticulitis, enterocolitis, or appendicitis was seen in 32 (35.6%) patients, and 6 (6.6%) patients had luminal cancer involvement at the time of perforation. The overall hospitalization rate related to perforation was 95.5%, with mortality of 15.5% during the same admission. Antibiotics were given in 95% of our sample; 37.8% of patients also required surgical/interventional radiology intervention. Forty-six patients (51.1%) had perforation-related complications (e.g., sepsis, fistula, abscess), which were associated with a higher mortality rate (30%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest a low incidence of bowel perforation after ICI treatment (0.6%), with 40% of patients having coexisting bowel inflammation as a potential contributing factor. Patients with bowel perforation had an aggressive disease course and high rates of hospitalization, complications, and mortality. Early recognition and prompt intervention is critical to improve patient outcomes. Future studies are warranted to further investigate the cause, predictive markers, and optimal treatment for this patient population.

Small Intestinal Perforation Caused by Enteric-coated Low-dose Aspirin

A 77-year-old man presented with abdominal pain for 1 week. He was taking enteric-coated low-dose aspirin (LDA) to prevent secondary cardiovascular events and a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Computed tomography indicated a small intestinal perforation; thus, small intestine resection was performed. Two months after surgery, he experienced a recurrence of the perforation. Since his repeated perforation was suspected to be due to LDA, LDA was discontinued. He has experienced no further recurrence since then. This is the first case of small intestinal perforation caused by enteric-coated LDA. Enteric-coated LDA may cause small intestinal perforation in patients with severe atherosclerosis under PPI administration.

Metastatic osteosarcoma bowel perforation secondary to chemotherapy-induced tumour necrosis

Osteosarcoma is the most common paediatric and adolescent primary bone malignancy and is highly chemosensitive. Gastrointestinal metastases from osteosarcomas are rare. Bowel perforation secondary to chemotherapy is a potential serious complication reported in ovarian, colorectal and haematological malignancies. We report the first documented case of chemotherapy-mediated bowel perforation in an osteosarcoma patient with gastrointestinal metastases. A man in his 20s, with a history of resected osteosarcoma in remission, presented with abdominal pain. A computed tomography (CT) scan demonstrated a large calcified intrabdominal mass (15×13×9 cm) consistent with new peritoneal disease. After one cycle of palliative ifosfamide and etoposide chemotherapy, he developed a large bowel perforation and neutropenic sepsis consequently requiring resection of the perforated mass. Chemotherapy-induced bowel perforation is a rare but serious complication that should be considered in patients with osteosarcoma, and other chemosensitive malignancies, with intra-abdominal metastases. Recommencement of systemic therapies after bowel complications must be assessed cautiously on a case-by-case basis.

Successful treatment of angioinvasive aspergillosis causing diaphragmatic rupture with bowel perforation and cerebral aspergillosis in a patient with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia: A case report

RATIONALE

Throughout the clinical course of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), aspergillosis infection remains a significant determinant of treatment outcomes and survival. To emphasize the importance of early diagnosis and appropriate application of integrated therapeutic approaches, we present a case of AML patient who survived through angioinvasive aspergillosis infection causing diaphragmatic rupture with bowel perforation and cerebral aspergillosis during active AML treatment.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 39-year old male with FLT3-mutated AML was transferred to our hospital due to persistent fever after induction therapy.

DIAGNOSIS AND INTERVENTIONS

During voriconazole treatment for his invasive pulmonary aspergillosis, the patient was diagnosed with colon perforation at splenic flexure and suspected perforation of left diaphragm with communication with left pleural space. Although pancytopenic, emergency laparotomy was performed with granulocyte transfusion. Also, dual antifungal therapy with voriconazole and micafungin was applied. With supportive care, he was able to successfully complete 3 cycles of consolidation using tyrosine kinase inhibitor. However, 80 days after the last chemotherapy, the patient experienced seizure caused by a single 1.5 cm sized enhancing mass in the right occipital lobe. Diagnostic and therapeutic mass removal was carried out, and pathology-confirmed cerebral aspergillosis was diagnosed.

OUTCOMES

The patient's neurologic symptoms are resolved and he is leukemia free, but remains on voriconazole for his cerebral aspergillosis till this day.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case highlights the importance of timely integrated intervention and adequate underlying disease control in treatment of invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. Such rigorous efforts can save even the most seemingly dismal case.

[A Case of Ramucirumab-Related Small Intestinal Perforation in Gastric Cancer]

A 54-year-old man underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection and ante-colic Roux-en-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer. The histopathological diagnosis was pT2N3aM0, pStage ⅢA, HER2 negative. After 8 courses of S-1 plus oxaliplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy, he was diagnosed as peritoneal dissemination and treated with ramucirumab(RAM)plus paclitaxel(PTX). On the 12th day of course 10, he visited to our hospital with abdominal pain. CT showed free air and massive ascites. Emergent surgery was performed under the diagnosis of gastrointestinal perforation. A small intestinal perforation in front of the jejunal limb near gastric-jejunal anastomosis was identified and there was no peritoneal dissemination. We performed partial resection of remnant stomach and jejunal limb by linear stapler and reconstruction by end to side gastric-jejunal anastomosis. Because the gastric and intestinal wall were quite fragile and RAM impaired wound healing as adverse event, we feared about leakage, but he had no major postoperative complications and discharged on the 33th day after surgery. After 24 courses of nivolumab as third-line chemotherapy, the peritoneal dissemination disappeared. He has been alive without recurrence for about 1 year since then.

[A Case of Jejunal Perforation by Ramucirumab Just below the Treitz Ligament Treated with Primary Suture]

We present a case of jejunal perforation just below the Treitz ligament treated with primary suture after administration of ramucirumab(RAM). The patient was a 74-year-old male. He was diagnosed with Stage Ⅳ sigmoid colon cancer with liver and lung metastasis. Laparoscopic sigmoid colon cancer resection was performed previously. As adjuvant chemotherapy, the patient received 3 courses of CapeOX plus bevacizumab(BEV)and 20 courses of FOLFOX plus BEV and was in PR. After operation for liver and lung metastases, the patient was observed without any treatment, but pelvic recurrence and lung metastasis were noted, and FOLFIRI plus RAM was started. On the 7th day after the second course, the patient experienced abdominal pain. Since an intestinal perforation was suspected, emergency surgery was performed on the same day. There was a 5-mm-diameter perforation in the jejunum just below the Treitz ligament, and were small ischemic changes near the perforation. The rest of the intestine was clear, the perforation was suspected due to RAM. Since anastomosis was difficult, we performed primary suture and decompression of the location. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on POD 18. Currently, RAM has been discontinued and chemotherapy is being continued with FOLFIRI.

COVID 19 and the risk of gastro-intestinal perforation: A case series and literature review

Background

COVID19 is a viral disease with pneumonia as its most common presentation. Many presentations and complications have been reported, but gastro-intestinal perforation has not received much attention.

Methods: three cases from our hospital are presented, and the current literature was reviewed.

Results, cases

All three patients were admitted to the ICU with respiratory failure due to COVID19 pneumonia and intubated. Our first patient was treated with steroids, and subsequently diagnosed with rectal perforation on day 34 of his hospital admission. The second patient was treated with steroids and tocilizumab, and diagnosed with colonic perforation 1 day after neostigmine administration, on day 14 of his hospital admission. Our third patient was treated with steroids and tocilizumab, and diagnosed colonic perforation 4 days after neostigmine administration, on day 14 of his hospital admission.

Results, literature

25 more cases were found in current literature, both upper GI and lower GI perforations, either as a presenting symptom or during the course of hospitalization. These were often associated with treatment with steroids, interleukin 6 inhibitors, or both.

Conclusions

Gastro-intestinal perforation is a rare but dangerous complication of COVID19. Treatment with tocilizumab and steroids may both increase the risk of this complication, and hamper diagnosis.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting therapy for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer ranks as the fourth leading cause of death from cancer in women. Historically, women with metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer have had limited treatment options. New anti-angiogenesis therapies, such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting agents, offer an alternative strategy to conventional chemotherapy; they act by inhibiting the growth of new blood vessels, thereby restricting tumour growth by blocking the blood supply.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of VEGF targeting agents in the management of persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, online registers of clinical trials, and abstracts of scientific meetings up until 27 May 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We examined randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of VEGF targeting agents alone or in combination with conventional chemotherapy or other VEGF targeting agents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently screened the results of search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to the standard methods expected by Cochrane. The certainty of evidence was assessed via the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1634 records were identified. From these, we identified four studies with a total of 808 participants for inclusion. We also identified two studies that were awaiting classification and nine ongoing studies. Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy Treatment with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy may result in lower risk of death compared to chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.95; 1 study, 452 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there are probably more specific adverse events when compared to chemotherapy alone, including gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae (risk ratio (RR) 18.00, 95% CI 2.42 to 133.67; 1 study, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); serious thromboembolic events (RR 4.5, 95% CI 1.55 to 13.08; 1 study, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and hypertension (RR 13.75, 95% CI 5.07 to 37.29; 1 study, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may also be a higher incidence of serious haemorrhage (RR 5.00, 95% CI 1.11 to 22.56; 1 study, 440 participants; low-certainty evidence). In addition, the incidence of serious adverse events is probably higher (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.79; 1 study, 439 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was USD 295,164 per quality-adjusted life-year (1 study, 452 participants; low-certainty evidence). Cediranib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy Treatment with cediranib plus chemotherapy may or may not result in similar risk of death when compared to chemotherapy alone (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.65; 1 study, 69 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found very uncertain results for the incidences of specific adverse events, including gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae (RR 3.27, 95% CI 0.14 to 77.57; 1 study, 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence); serious haemorrhage (RR 5.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 109.49; 1 study, 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence); serious thromboembolic events (RR 3.41, 95% CI 0.14 to 80.59; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and serious hypertension (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.02 to 8.62; 1 study, 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In addition, there may or may not be a similar incidence of serious adverse events compared to chemotherapy alone (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.78; 1 study, 67 participants; low-certainty evidence). Apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy versus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy Treatment with apatinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy/brachytherapy may or may not result in similar risk of death compared to chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy/brachytherapy alone (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.60; 1 study, 52 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, hypertension events may occur at a higher incidence as compared to chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy/brachytherapy alone (RR 5.14, 95% CI 1.28 to 20.73; 1 study, 52 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pazopanib plus lapatinib versus lapatinib Treatment with pazopanib plus lapatinib may result in higher risk of death compared to lapatinib alone (HR 2.71, 95% CI 1.16 to 6.31; 1 study, 117 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found very uncertain results for the incidences of specific adverse events, including gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.59; 1 study, 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence); haemorrhage (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.72 to 5.58; 1 study, 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and thromboembolic events (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.12 to 72.50; 1 study, 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In addition, the incidence of hypertension events is probably higher (RR 12.00, 95% CI 2.94 to 49.01; 1 study, 152 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may or may not be a similar incidence of serious adverse events as compared to lapatinib alone (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.26; 1 study, 152 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pazopanib versus lapatinib Treatment with pazopanib may or may not result in similar risk of death as compared to lapatinib (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.38; 1 study, 152 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found very uncertain results for the incidences of specific adverse events, including gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.12; 1 study, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence); haemorrhage (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.40; 1 study, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and thromboembolic events (RR 3.08, 95% CI 0.13 to 74.42; 1 study, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In addition, the incidence of hypertension events is probably higher (RR 11.81, 95% CI 2.89 to 48.33; 1 study, 150 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The risk of serious adverse events may or may not be similar as compared to lapatinib (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.07; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low-certainty evidence in favour of the use of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy. However, bevacizumab probably increases specific adverse events (gastrointestinal perforations or fistulae, thromboembolic events, hypertension) and serious adverse events. We found low-certainty evidence that does not support the use of cediranib plus chemotherapy, apatinib plus chemotherapy, apatinib plus chemotherapy/brachytherapy, or pazopanib monotherapy. We found low-certainty evidence suggesting that pazopanib plus lapatinib worsens outcomes. The VEGF inhibitors apatinib and pazopanib may increase the probability of hypertension events.

Results of a national survey on the use of stents for the treatment of colonic obstruction

INTRODUCTION

We distributed a survey in order to determine the current indications for the use of colonic stents to treat colonic obstruction in Spain and its compliance with international guidelines.

METHODS

Descriptive study of a survey distributed by the Spanish Association of Surgeons (Asociación Española de Cirujanos), the Catalan Society of Surgery (Societat Catalana de Cirurgia) and the Spanish Society of Digestive Endoscopy (Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva).

RESULTS

340 valid responses were received: 25% from gastrointestinal specialists, and 75% from general surgeons. During the last year, 44.4% of respondents assessed between 10 and 20 COC. Of these, 52.2% indicated less than 5 stents/year, 75% of which were indicated as a prior step to preferential surgery and only 25% were performed with palliative intent. 55.3% of the participants reported knowing the official guidelines, and 64% of respondents would use the stent as a step prior to surgery in elderly patients with localized disease. 75.9% would place stents as palliative therapy in young patients with carcinomatosis, and 61.8% would use them in stage IV malignancies under treatment with chemotherapy. Only 18.1% knew of the risk of colon perforation after stent placement in patients undergoing treatment with antiangiogenics.

CONCLUSIONS

In Spain, the indication for colonic stents is reserved for selected cases and varies according to the specialty and the years of experience of the respondent. The compliance with international guidelines of most respondents is moderate. It is important to insist on the high risk of perforation after angiogenics, which is unknown to most surgeons.

[A Case of Gastric Cancer with Ramucirumab-Related Colon Perforation after a Subtotal Colectomy]

A 61-year-old man with advanced gastric cancer underwent distal gastrectomy after chemotherapy. Fifteen months later, peritoneal metastasis and colon stenosis were detected. Therefore, subtotal colectomy and ileosigmoidostomy were performed. Three weeks later, paclitaxel(PTX)treatment was initiated, followed by nab-PTX with ramucirumab(Ram)treatment at 7 weeks postoperatively. The patient experienced sudden abdominal pain diagnosed as gastrointestinal perforation 13 weeks postoperatively. Operative findings showed that the anastomosis of the ileosigmoidostomy was perforated, and this was treated using sutures. Angiogenesis inhibitors should be carefully administered even 4 weeks or more after surgery.

Recurrent Cervical Cancer with Intestinal Perforation That Was Related to Bevacizumab after Long-term NSAIDs Administration and Was Treated with Laparoscopy-assisted Anastomosis

Bevacizumab is an effective drug for recurrent/advanced cervical cancer. A 59-year-old patient diagnosed with FIGO stage I B2 squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix at our hospital was treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy as initial treatment. The outcome was judged as close to CR. Local recurrence in the irradiation field and paraaortic lymph node metastasis were noted 2 months after completion of this treatment. Chemotherapy of bevacizumab combined with paclitaxel plus carboplatin (TC) was initiated for recurrent cervical cancer. At 17 days after the 4th cycle, abdominal pain suddenly developed, and a close examination detected free air on abdominal CT, based on which intestinal perforation was diagnosed. Laparoscopic surgery performed to investigate the intraabdominal cavity showed that the small intestine was perforated at 2 sites. These were treated with laparoscopy-assisted partial resection of the small intestine and functional end-to-end anastomosis. Drug therapy for the recurrent cervical cancer was considered, but the primary disease rapidly aggravated and the patient died of the primary disease 11 months after completion of the initial treatment.

Treatment dilemma for survivors of rituximab-induced bowel perforation in the setting of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is a recognised complication of solid and haematopoietic stem cell transplant. It consists of a heterogeneous group of lymphoid neoplasms that arises secondary to post-transplant immunosuppression. Although there is no definite standard of care for the optimal treatment for PTLD, rituximab, a monoclonal antibody, with and/or without chemotherapy (usually CHOP=cytoxan, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) has become a routine part of the treatment of any CD20 (+) PTLD, with response rates similar to chemotherapy with decreased toxicity. A rare and often lethal, complication of rituximab therapy for PTLD is bowel perforation secondary to tumour lysis of lymphoma involving the intestine. A small number of cases of bowel perforation have been reported, with very few documented survivors. The risk for recurrent perforation in the setting of ongoing rituximab treatment is unknown. There is sparse data supporting how to best treat the survivors.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies (Bevacizumab, Cetuximab, and Panitumumab) in Combination with Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The last decade has seen the increasing use of biological medicines in combination with chemotherapy containing 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin or irinotecan for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). These combinations have resulted in increased progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with mCRC; however, there are remaining concerns over the extent of their effect on overall survival (OS). Published studies to date suggest no major differences between the three currently available monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs); however, there are differences in costs. In addition, there is rising litigation in Brazil in order to access these medicines as they are currently not reimbursed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the comparative effectiveness and safety of three MoAbs (bevacizumab, cetuximab and panitumumab) associated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens and compared to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone in patients with mCRC, through an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of concurrent or non-concurrent observational cohort studies, to guide authorities and the judiciary.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed based on cohort studies published in databases up to November 2017. Effectiveness measures included OS, PFS, post-progression survival (PPS), Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), response rate, metastasectomy and safety. The methodological quality of the studies was also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 observational cohort studies were included. There were statistically significant and clinically relevant benefits in patients treated with bevacizumab versus no bevacizumab mainly around OS, PFS, PPS and the metastasectomy rate, but not for the disease control rates. However, there was an increase in treatment-related toxicities and concerns with the heterogeneity of the studies.

CONCLUSION

The results pointed to an advantage in favor of bevacizumab for OS, PFS, PPS, and metastasectomy. Although this advantage may be considered clinically modest, bevacizumab represents a hope for increased survival and a chance of metastasectomy for patients with mCRC. However, there are serious adverse events associated with its use, especially severe hypertension and gastrointestinal perforation, that need to be considered.

Severe inflammatory ileitis resulting in ileal perforation in association with combination immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic malignant melanoma

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become standard of care in metastatic malignant melanoma management. Despite superior effectiveness to chemotherapy, significant immune-related adverse events (irAE) may occur, particularly if used in combination. Gastrointestinal irAEs were reported with different patterns of involvement. Here, we report the case of a patient who had ileal perforation as a complication of terminal ileitis, without colitis, induced by combination immune checkpoint blockade.

Crizotinib-induced Rectal Perforation with Abscess

An 86-year-old Japanese man was diagnosed with stage IV lung adenocarcinoma. The patient was treated with crizotinib after echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4)-anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement was detected from his pleural effusion. He subsequently developed abdominal pain and rebound tenderness in the right lower abdomen. Contrast-enhanced abdominal CT showed a low-density area in the abdominal cavity. The size of the abscess was decreased by drainage and the administration of antibiotics. Fistulography revealed a fistula from the rectum to the abscess, and a diagnosis of lower intestinal tract perforation with abscess formation was made. Crizotinib was discontinued and treatment with alectinib was initiated. The patient remains under treatment as an outpatient at our department without adverse effects.

[Four Cases of Gastrointestinal Perforation Associated with Bevacizumab]

Four cases of gastrointestinal perforation associated with bevacizumab(BEV)were examined. Case 1: A 82-year-old male received FOLFIRI plus BEV for recurrent liver metastasis after rectal cancer resection. A lower esophageal perforation occurred 22 days after BEV administration and drainage was performed. Case 2: A 69-year-old female received FOLFOX4 plus BEV for unresectable rectal cancer and liver and lung metastasis. A rectal perforation occurred 6 days after BEV administration and suturing closure of the hole and colostomy was performed. Case 3: A 69-year-old female, received carboplatin(CBDCA) plus pemetrexed(PEM)plus BEV for unresectable left lung cancer and adrenal gland and lymph node metastasis. A small intestinal perforation occurred 15 days after BEV administration and ileocecal resection and primary anastomosis was performed. Case 4: A 73-year-old female received CBDCA plus PEM plus BEV for unresectable left lung carcinoma and pleural metastasis. A diverticulum of sigmoid colon perforation occurred 30 days after BEV administration and suturing closure of the hole and colostomy was performed. When we observe fever, abdominal pain, elevation of the inflammatory reaction after BEV administration, we should immediately examine gastrointestinal perforation.

[A Case of Fournier's Gangrene Due to Perforation of Lower Rectal Cancer during Chemotherapy]

Fournier's gangrene is a rapidly progressing bacterial infection, involving the subcutaneous and deep fascia. Although intestinal perforation after treatment with bevacizumab is well known, Fournier's gangrene rarely occurs during chemotherapy. A 73-year-old man with unresectable rectal cancer during chemotherapy involving the mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab regimen had a consciousness disorder and was admitted to our hospital on emergency. Computed tomography scans indicated a necrotizing soft tissue infection with large amounts of pneumoderma throughout the perineum. He was diagnosed as having Fournier's gangrene via perforation of rectal cancer, and urgent operation was performed. After debridement of the skin and soft tissue around the perineum, loop sigmoidostomy was performed. A nice granulated tissue bed over the perineum was formed via daily lavage with sarin. Although the patient was taken back to the operation theater for ileostomy, he could resume chemotherapy involving mFOLFOX6 without bevacizumab 50 days after the initial operation. It is necessary to pay attention to Fournier's gangrene via perforation during chemotherapy with bevacizumab in patients with lower rectal cancer.

Risk of gastrointestinal perforation in patients taking oral fluoroquinolone therapy: An analysis of nationally representative cohort

Background

Fluoroquinolone is a commonly prescribed antimicrobial agent, and up to 20% of its users registers adverse gastroenterological symptoms. We aimed to evaluate the association between use of fluoroquinolone and gastrointestinal tract perforation.

Methods

We conducted a nested case-control study on a national health insurance claims database between 1998 and 2011. The use of fluoroquinolones was classified into current (< 60 days), past (61–365 days prior to the index date) and any prior year use of fluoroquinolones. We used the conditional logistic regression model to estimate rate ratios (RRs), adjusting or matching by a disease risk score (DRS).

Results

We identified a cohort of 17,510 individuals diagnosed with gastrointestinal perforation and matched them to 1,751,000 controls. Current use of fluoroquinolone was associated with the greatest increase in risk of gastrointestinal perforations after DRS score adjustment (RR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.62–2.22). The risk of gastrointestinal perforation was attenuated for past (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.20–1.47) and any prior year use (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.34–1.59). To gain insights into whether the observed association can be explained by unmeasured confounder, we compared the risk of gastrointestinal perforation between fluoroquinolone and macrolide. Use of macrolide, an active comparator, was not associated with a significant increased risk of gastrointestinal perforation (RR, 1.11, 95%CI, 0.15–7.99). Sensitivity analysis focusing on perforation requiring in-hospital procedures also demonstrated an increased risk associated with current use. To mitigate selection bias, we have also excluded people who have never used fluoroquinolone before or people with infectious colitis, enteritis or gastroenteritis. In both of the analysis, a higher risk of gastrointestinal perforation was still associated with the use of fluoroquinolone.

Conclusions

We found that use of fluoroquinolones was associated with a non-negligible increased risk of gastrointestinal perforation, and physicians should be aware of this possible association.

[Early postnatal application of glucocorticoids for preventing bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants: a Meta analysis]

OBJECTIVE

To study the clinical effect and safety of early postnatal application of glucocorticoids in the prevention of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) in preterm infants.

METHODS

The databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP were comprehensively searched for articles on early postnatal application of glucocorticoids in the prevention of BPD in preterm infants published up to June 2016. Review Manager 5.3 was used for the Meta analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 2 962 participants were enrolled in the 16 RCTs, with 1 486 patients in the trial group and 1 476 in the control group. The Meta analysis showed that early postnatal application of glucocorticoids reduced the incidence rate of BPD at a corrected gestational age of 36 weeks (OR=0.73, 95%CI: 0.61-0.87, P=0.0004), but there was an increase in the risk of hyperglycemia (OR=1.61, 95%CI: 1.24-2.09, P=0.0003), hypertension (OR=1.63, 95%CI: 1.11-2.38, P=0.01), and intestinal perforation (OR=1.51, 95%CI: 1.12-2.04, P=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

At present, it is not recommended to use glucocorticoids to prevent BPD in preterm infants. Its advantages and disadvantages need further studies, with special focuses on the adverse effects of hyperglycemia, hypertension, and intestinal perforation.

Association of in utero magnesium exposure and spontaneous intestinal perforations in extremely low birth weight infants

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to determine whether antenatal exposure to magnesium is associated with spontaneous intestinal perforation (SIP) in extremely low birth weight (ELBW) infants (⩽1000 g).

STUDY DESIGN

We identified all ELBW infants admitted to 1 of 323 neonatal intensive care units from 2007 to 2013. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare outcomes in the first 21 days after birth between infants exposed and unexposed to magnesium in utero.

RESULTS

Of the 28 035 infants, 11 789 (42%) were exposed to antenatal magnesium (AM). There was no difference in the risk of SIP, odds ratio=1.08 (95% confidence interval; 0.91 to 1.29), between infants exposed and unexposed to AM. Mortality in the first 21 days after birth was lower in the magnesium-exposed infants, odds ratio=0.76 (0.70 to 0.83).

CONCLUSION

AM exposure in ELBW infants was not associated with increased risk of SIP.

[A Case of Malignant Lymphoma of the Jejunum That Developed Stenosis and Perforation after a Complete Response to Chemotherapy]

A 57-year-old woman was admitted owing to epigastric pain.Abdominal computed tomography demonstrated a tumor in the origin of the jejunum.After an endoscopic biopsy, we diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.We treated her with CHOP chemotherapy because pancreaticoduodenectomy is highly invasive.After 1 course of chemotherapy, the tumor was reduced.However, she developed a jejunal stenosis; therefore, we performed laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy.Furthermore, she developed perforated peritonitis on the sixth day after the surgery, and therefore, an emergency partial jejunum resection was performed.Histopathologically, viable lymphoma cells were not found in the resected intestine.She had a complete response 10 months after the surgery.Chemotherapy may cause intestinal stenosis and perforation requiring surgery; therefore, decisions about surgical procedures must be made carefully.

Duodenal Perforation Secondary to Erlotinib Therapy in a Patient With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is a lethal disease with high mortality, and treatment modality varies with type of tumor and stage of the disease. Targeted molecular therapies have been developed for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. The presence of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation qualifies the patient for EGFR-TKI (tyrosine kinase inhibitor) therapy such as erlotinib, which is not without risk. We report an interesting case of duodenal perforation secondary to erlotinib therapy. This is the second reported case of bowel perforation after erlotinib therapy in a patient with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Trametinib (MEKINIST°) Metastatic or inoperable BRAF V600-positive melanoma: a few extra months of life

About 50% of patients with meta- static or inoperable melanoma carry a tumour with BRAF V600 mutation.The drug of first choice for these patients is vemurafenib, a BRAF inhibitor, which appears to prolong survival by a few months. Dabrafenib is a vemurafenib me-too with a slightly different known profile of adverse effects. Trametinib, a MEK inhibitor, is now authorised in the European Union for use in this setting, either as monotherapy or in combination with dabrafenib (marketed by the same company). Trametinib monotherapy has not been compared to BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. In a randomised, unblinded trial versus cytotoxic drugs in 322 patients, the median survival time did not differ statistically between the groups (15.6 versus 11.3 months; p = 0.09), but 65% of patients in the chemotherapy group received trametinib after disease pro- gression, making it more difficult to detect a difference between the groups. In an unblinded randomised controlled trial in 704 patients who had never received treatment for metastatic or inoperable disease, the trametinib + dabrafenib combination prolonged median survival by about 8 months more than vemurafenib. In another double-blind randomised controlled trial in 423 patients, median survival was about 6 months longer with trametinib + dabrafenib than with placebo + dabrafenib. The trametinib+ dabrafenibcombination was poorly effective after BRAF inhibitor failure in non-comparative trials including a few dozen patients in which the only endpoint was tumour response. Trametinib has many adverse effects, some of which can be life-threatening, such as heart failure, deep vein thrombosis, bleeding (including intracranial haemorrhage), neutropenia, and gastrointestinal perforation. Trametinib also causes retinal disorders and pneumonitis. Combining trametinib with dabrafenib reduces the risk of hyperkeratosis and skin cancer associated with dabrafenib, but increases the frequency of fever (including very high fever). Trametinib interactions mainly involve additive effects or antagonism. In practice, when a patient with metastatic or inoperable BRAF V600-positive melanoma is willing to accept the significant toxicity of trametinib in the hope of gaining several extra months of life, the trametinib + dabrafenib combination is a first-line option.

Adverse events risk associated with anti-VEGFR agents in the treatment of advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

To perform this meta-analysis, we investigated the risk of the most clinically relevant adverse events related to antivascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) agents in advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).A comprehensive literature search for studies published up to October 2015 was performed. Prospective randomized controlled phase II/III clinical trials that comparing therapy with or without anti-VEGFR agents for advanced NSCLC were included for analysis. Summary relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects or fixed effects according to the heterogeneity among included trials.A total of 11,701 patients from 18 clinical trials were included for analysis. Pooled RR showed that the use of anti-VEGFR agents significantly increased the risk of developing hypertension (RR 4.71, 95% CI 3.29-6.73, P < 0.001) and fatal adverse events (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.58, P = 0.001). No statistically significant differences were found for gastrointestinal (GI) perforation (P = 0.41), arterial or venous thromboembolic events (P = 0.49 and P = 0.16, respectively), or hemorrhagic events (P = 0.81). Sensitive analysis indicated that the significance estimate of pooled RR of fatal adverse event (FAEs) was not significantly influenced by omitting any single study.The use of anti-VEGFR agents in advanced NSCLC does significantly increase the risk of hypertension and fatal adverse events, but not for arterial or venous thromboembolic events, GI perforation, or hemorrhagic events.

[Two Episodes of Colostomy-Associated Intestinal Perforation during Chemotherapy for Metastatic Rectal Cancer]

A 77-year-old woman with rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastasis underwent a Hartmann operation with D3 lymph node dissection in June 2014. mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab(bev)was then administered to treat the liver metastasis.In February 2015, multiple liver metastases were detected and the regimen was changed to FOLFIRI plus bev.After 3 courses, peritonitis due to intestinal perforation around the descending colostomy occurred, and an emergency operation(partial resection of the descending colon and transverse colostomy)was performed.FOLFIRI was then administered from 2 months after the operation.After 3 courses of this regimen, a CT scan showed progression of the hepatic metastases.The regimen was therefore changed to mFOLFOX6.Five months later, another CT scan showed an intestinal perforation of the transverse colostomy at the abdominal wall, and an emergency cecostomy was performed.At this stage, chemotherapy was ceased.This case highlights the risk of intestinal perforation during chemotherapy, regardless of the use of bev.

Risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients receiving ramucirumab: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Although existing evidence from clinical trials has demonstrated manifestation of gastrointestinal perforation with the use of ramucirumab, overall risks have yet to be reported. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to get a better understanding of the overall incidence and risk of gastrointestinal perforation associated with ramucirumab.

METHODS

The PubMed and Web of Science databases as well as abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology conferences were searched to identify relevant studies published up to 01 May 2015. Eligible studies included randomized trials of ramucirumab either alone or in combination with another agent compared with the control arm without ramucirumab and that reported gastrointestinal perforation event. Overall incidence, relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 4579 patients with a variety of solid malignancies from six RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. The incidence of gastrointestinal perforation related to ramucirumab was 1.5% (95% CI 1.1-2.1%) with a mortality of 29.8% (95% CI 14.9-50.7%). The RR of gastrointestinal perforation associated with ramucirumab was 2.56 (95% CI 1.29-5.09; P  =  0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with the ramucirumab is associated with a significant increase in risk of gastrointestinal perforation in cancer patients.

[A Case of Fournier's Gangrene Caused by Small Intestinal Perforation during Bevacizumab Combination Chemotherapy]

A 51-year-old man underwent abdominoperineal resection for advanced rectal cancer at a hospital. He attended our outpatient clinic 58 months later with pain in the external genitalia, and was diagnosed with local pelvic recurrence and metastasis to the para-aortic lymph node and both adrenal glands. He received a total of 30 Gy of radiation for analgesia; subsequently, chemotherapy(mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab)was initiated. However, extreme left buttock and left femoral pain developed after the 6 courses of chemotherapy. Abdominal CT revealed Fournier's gangrene caused by small intestinal perforation. Emergency drainage under spinal anesthesia was immediately performed. Two additional drainage procedures were required thereafter and an ileostomy was constructed. The patient was discharged 100 days after the initial drainage. This is an extremely rare example of a bevacizumab-related small intestinal perforation that developed into Fournier's gan- grene.

Bowel Perforation Associated With Infliximab Use in a Pediatrics Patient

Crohn's disease (CD) is an idiopathic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract and typically causes inflammation with granuloma formation. Biologic agents like infliximab (IFX) that target tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), have emerged as important medications for treating refractory CD. With increasing use, there also are reports of rare but potentially fatal complications associated with exposure to TNF-α, such as bowel perforation. We present a case report of spontaneous bowel perforation in a child with Crohn's while on IFX therapy, and a review of the current literature. The purpose of this report is to alert physicians to this rare association, especially in pediatric patients with intestinal strictures.

[A Case of Multiple Bevacizumab-Related Colonic Perforations during Opioid Use]

We present the case ofa 54-year-old man who had been treated with bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy for a postoperative recurrence of lung cancer for 5 months; he had used opioids for cancer pain in his right lateral chest for 2 months. He was admitted to the hospital because his chest pain had worsened 5 days earlier and he was experiencing a dull pain in his lower abdomen. His condition was recognized as an aggravation of the cancer pain and his opioid dose was increased. He presented with intense abdominal pain 6 days after admission, and we diagnosed gastrointestinal perforations from an abdominal CT scan. Therefore, we undertook an emergency operation. Multiple perforations were seen on the transverse and descending colon; an extensive colectomy and a colostomy were performed. Histopathological findings showed that multiple ulcer perforations and normal mucosa coexisted throughout the resected specimen. Bevacizumab-induced ischemic changes were the suspected cause. When pain control becomes variable during opioid use, conditions such as bevacizumab-related gastrointestinal perforations should be considered, in addition to progression of the cancer pain itself, and the appropriate treatment should be administered.

[Two Cases of Bowel Perforation during Chemotherapy with Bevacizumab to Metastatic Rectal Cancer]

Case 1: A male patient in his 60's who had rectal cancer and liver metastases underwent Hartmann's operation in January 2009. In April 2009, he received chemotherapy with modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab as second-line treatment. Thirteen days later, he complained of abdominal pain and visited the emergency department. Computed tomography(CT)revealed gastrointestinal tract perforation. He underwent emergency surgery. However, dirty brownish ascites was observed, and the perforation point of the gastrointestinal tract could not be found. We suspected perforation of the colon and created an artificial anus in the terminal ileum. After the surgery, his condition improved. Case 2: A male patient in his 60's who had rectal cancer underwent Miles' operation in March 2005. In February 2010, CT revealed local recurrence in the presacral region. After radiotherapy, he received chemotherapy with CapeOX plus bevacizumab. During the course of the chemotherapy, he was admitted for upper abdominal pain and fever. He was diagnosed with a perforation of the transverse colon and underwent emergency surgery. After the surgery, drainage was needed for peritonitis, for about 1 month. At 93 days after the surgery, he was discharged. Gastrointestinal tract perforation is one of the most serious adverse events associated with bevacizumab. To avoid death caused by serious adverse events, medical staff and patient orientation or education on the possible serious adverse event is very important.

[Efficacy of Postoperative Chemotherapy in Stage Ⅳ Colorectal Cancer with Perforation]

The clinical outcome and efficacy of postoperative chemotherapy in patients with Stage Ⅳ colorectal cancer with perforation were investigated. We compared the clinical outcomes between 11 patients with Stage Ⅳ colorectal cancer (perforation group), who underwent emergency surgery for colonic perforation between September 2005 and March 2012, and 22 matched patients (matching group) who underwent elective colorectal surgery during the same period. The colostomy rate in the perforation group was significantly higher than that of the matching group: patients with perforation received stoma construction surgery more frequently (p<0.01). Seven patients (64%) in the perforation group received postoperative chemotherapy, while 20 patients (91%) in the matching group received chemotherapy (p=0.15). Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was administered to all patients in both groups. There was no difference in the median relative dose intensity of oxaliplatin between these groups (p=0.37). No significant difference was observed between the cumulative 3-year overall survival rate in the perforation group and that of the matching group (35% and 54%, respectively; p=0.35). Moreover, the 3-year overall survival rates of patients who received oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were 51%in the perforation group and 57% in the matching group (p=0.74). Our results suggest that postoperative oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy may improve the prognosis of patients with Stage Ⅳ colorectal cancer with perforation.

Gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal metastases receiving bevacizumab

AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to first-line chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal disease.

METHODS: We compared rates of gastrointestinal perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and peritoneal disease receiving first-line chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in three distinct cohorts: (1) the AGITG MAX trial (Phase III randomised clinical trial comparing capecitabine vs capecitabine and bevacizumab vs capecitabine, bevacizumab and mitomycinC); (2) the prospective Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) registry (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab); and (3) two cancer centres in New South Wales, Australia [Macarthur Cancer Therapy Centre and Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre (NSWCC) from January 2005 to Decenber 2012, (any first-line regimen ± bevacizumab). For the AGITG MAX trial capecitabine was compared to the other two arms (capecitabine/bevacizumab and capecitabine/bevacizumab/mitomycinC). In the AGITG MAX trial and the TRACC registry rates of gastrointestinal perforation were also collected in patients who did not have peritoneal metastases. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, chemotherapy duration, and overall survival. Time-to-event outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS: Eighty-four MAX, 179 TRACC and 69 NSWCC patients had peritoneal disease. There were no gastrointestinal perforations recorded in either the MAX subgroup or the NSWCC cohorts. Of the patients without peritoneal disease in the MAX trial, 4/300 (1.3%) in the bevacizumab arms had gastrointestinal perforations compared to 1/123 (0.8%) in the capecitabine alone arm. In the TRACC registry 3/126 (2.4%) patients who had received bevacizumab had a gastrointestinal perforation compared to 1/53 (1.9%) in the chemotherapy alone arm. In a further analysis of patients without peritoneal metastases in the TRACC registry, the rate of gastrointestinal perforations was 9/369 (2.4%) in the chemotherapy/bevacizumab group and 5/177 (2.8%) in the chemotherapy alone group. The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy was associated with improved progression-free survival in all three cohorts: MAX 6.9 m vs 4.9 m, HR = 0.64 (95%CI: 0.42-1.02); P = 0.063; TRACC 9.1 m vs 5.5 m, HR = 0.61 (95%CI: 0.37-0.86); P = 0.009; NSWCC 8.7 m vs 6.8 m, HR = 0.75 (95%CI: 0.43-1.32); P = 0.32. Chemotherapy duration was similar across the groups.

CONCLUSION: Patients with peritoneal disease do not appear to have an increased risk of gastrointestinal perforations when receiving first-line therapy with bevacizumab compared to systemic therapy alone.

[Four cases of bevacizumab-related gastrointestinal perforation]

We report 4 cases of gastrointestinal perforation associated with systemic administration of bevacizumab. Case 1: A 51- year-old man with colorectal cancer (CRC) received mFOLFOX+bevacizumab (Bev). A small intestinal perforation occurred 7 days after Bev administration (Bev-a) and was successfully treated with omental packing. Case 2: A 50-year-old woman with CRC received capecitabine+Bev. A small intestinal perforation was detected 5 days after Bev-a, and was successfully treated with primary suture and an omental flap. Case 3: A 74-year-old man with CRC received CapeOX+Bev. A duodenal perforation occurred on the same day as Bev-a, but could be treated conservatively. Case 4: A 57-year-old man with lung cancer received DTX+Bev. A small intestinal perforation occurred 13 days after Bev-a, but this could be managed with primary suture and an omental flap. The gastrointestinal perforation presented with mild abdominal pain and was detected within 14 days after Bev-a in each of these 4 cases. Three patients were successfully treated with only minimal surgical procedures and 1 patient could be managed with conservative treatment for a perforated duodenal ulcer.

[A case of fixing an anastomotic site to the abdominal wall out of the abdominal cavity for a small intestinal perforation during chemotherapy]

A 53-year-old man presented with a continuous high fever and was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with metastasis to the lung, spleen, and mesenterium. He was treated with cyclophosphamide and prednisolone followed by administration of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) chemotherapy 20 days later. Two days after initiation of CHOP therapy, the patient complained of severe abdominal pain. Perforative peritonitis was diagnosed using abdominal computed tomography. A perforation of the small intestine approximately 160 cm distal to the Treitz ligament was uncovered during emergency laparotomy. The risk of leakage was considered too high for anastomosis of the small intestine to be performed. Further, construction of an intestinal stoma could result in a high-output syndrome that could lead to difficulty in resuming chemotherapy. Based on these considerations, we fixed the anastomotic region to the abdominal wall using a technique similar to construction of an intestinal stoma. Post-operative anastomotic leakage did not occur. Nine days later, a perineal hernia was noted near the anastomotic site and a second operation was performed. The anastomotic site was placed back into the abdominal cavity during this operation. CHOP therapy was resumed 16 days after the first operation.

Corticosteroids and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether corticosteroids are associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing a corticosteroid to placebo for any medical condition or in healthy participants. Studies with steroids given either locally, as a single dose, or in crossover studies were excluded.

DATA SOURCES

Literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews between 1983 and 22 May 2013.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Outcome measures were the occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation. Predefined subgroup analyses were carried out for disease severity, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or gastroprotective drugs, and history of peptic ulcer.

RESULTS

159 studies (N=33 253) were included. In total, 804 (2.4%) patients had a gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation (2.9% and 2.0% for corticosteroids and placebo). Corticosteroids increased the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation by 40% (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). The risk was increased for hospitalised patients (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). For patients in ambulatory care, the increased risk was not statistically significant (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 6.34). Only 11 gastrointestinal bleeds or perforations occurred among 8651 patients in ambulatory care (0.13%). Increased risk was still present in subgroup analyses (studies with NSAID use excluded; OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.71, peptic ulcer as an exclusion criterion excluded; OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.78, and use of gastroprotective drugs excluded; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid use was associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation. The increased risk was statistically significant for hospitalised patients only. For patients in ambulatory care, the total occurrence of bleeding or perforation was very low, and the increased risk was not statistically significant.