The exploration of surgery and survival prediction in patients with peritoneal metastasis from gastric adenocarcinoma based on the SEER database

Background

As one of the most common diseases in terms of cancer-related mortality worldwide, gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) frequently develops peritoneal metastases (PMs) in advanced stages. Systemic therapy or optimal supportive care are recommended for advanced GA; however, patients frequently develop drug resistance. Surgical resection is not recommended for stage IV patients, and there have been some controversies regarding the role of it in GA patients with PMs. The aim of the study was to preliminarily evaluate the possible effect of surgical treatments on patients with only PMs from GA.

Methods

Data were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (year 2000-2022). A propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce the influence of selection bias and confounding variables on comparisons. Then Cox proportional hazard regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and log-rank test were performed to assess the efficacy of surgical treatment in patients with PMs from GA.

Results

A total of 399 patients diagnosed with PMs from GA were enrolled for our analysis, of which, 180 (45.1%) patients did not receive surgery and 219 (54.9%) patients received surgery. Multivariate Cox regression analysis before PSM indicated higher rates of overall survival (OS) outcome for patients who had received surgery [hazard ratio (HR) =0.4342, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.3283-0.5742, P<0.001]. After PSM, a total of 172 patients were enrolled, with 86 in each group. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that surgery was the independent factor reflecting patients' survival (HR =0.4382, 95% CI: 0.3037-0.6324, P<0.001). Subgroup survival analysis revealed that surgery may bring advantages to patients with grades I-IV, stages T1-T4, stage N0, and tumor size less than 71 mm (P<0.05). We also found that the OS of chemotherapy patients who had undergone surgery was better than that of chemotherapy patients who had not undergone surgery (P<0.01).

Conclusions

Based on the SEER database, surgery has better OS for patients only with PMs from GA. Patients without lymph node metastasis and those who received chemotherapy before may benefit from surgery. These specific groups of patients may have surgery as an option to improve the prognosis.

Multicenter dose-escalation Phase I trial of mitomycin C pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy in combination with systemic chemotherapy for appendiceal and colorectal peritoneal metastases: rationale and design

Objectives

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) from appendiceal cancer or colorectal cancer (CRC) has significant morbidity and limited survival. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a minimally invasive approach to treat PM. We aim to conduct a dose-escalation trial of mitomycin C (MMC)-PIPAC combined with systemic chemotherapy (FOLFIRI) in patients with PM from appendiceal cancer or CRC.

Methods

This is a multicenter Phase I study of MMC-PIPAC (NCT04329494). Inclusion criteria include treatment with at least 4 months of first- or second-line systemic chemotherapy with ineligibility for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). Exclusion criteria are: progression on chemotherapy; extraperitoneal metastases; systemic chemotherapy intolerance; bowel obstruction; or poor performance status (ECOG>2). Escalating MMC-PIPAC doses (7-25 mg/m2) will be administered in combination with standard dose systemic FOLFIRI. Safety evaluation will be performed on 15 patients (dose escalation) and six expansion patients: 21 evaluable patients total.

Results

The primary endpoints are recommended MMC dose and safety of MMC-PIPAC with FOLFIRI. Secondary endpoints are assessment of response (by peritoneal regression grade score; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST 1.1], and peritoneal carcinomatosis index), progression free survival, overall survival, technical failure rate, surgical complications, conversion to curative-intent CRS-HIPEC, patient-reported outcomes, and functional status. Longitudinal blood and tissue specimens will be collected for translational correlatives including pharmacokinetics, circulating biomarkers, immune profiling, and single-cell transcriptomics.

Conclusions

This Phase I trial will establish the recommended dose of MMC-PIPAC in combination with FOLFIRI. Additionally, we expect to detect an early efficacy signal for further development of this therapeutic combination.

The clinical effect of conversion surgery for advanced gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of gastric cancer (GC) patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) is extremely poor. We developed a new promising regimen combining intraperitoneal (i.p.) paclitaxel (PTX) with systemic PTX and S-1 chemotherapy for GC patients with PM. However, the value of conversion surgery (CS) for GC patients with PM remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the clinical effect of CS from our updated previous report.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 50 GC patients, divided into chemotherapy alone (CTx; n=15) and conversion surgery intervention (CSI; n=35) groups. In the CTx group, chemotherapy was continued in responders, while in the CSI group, surgery was performed in chemotherapy-responders. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of the two groups. The secondary endpoint was the safety of CS.

RESULTS

In the CTx group, 9 of 15 patients (60%) responded to chemotherapy. In the CSI group, PM disappeared in 22 of 35 patients (62.9%), all of whom underwent CS. Post-operative complications occurred in 2 patients (9%) who underwent CS. There were no treatment-related deaths. Regarding OS, there was no significant difference between the two groups [P=0.14; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.3016-1.197], nor between chemotherapy-responders in the two groups (P=0.059; 95% CI, 0.1473-1.039). However, four patients in the CSI group have survived more than 5 years after CS.

CONCLUSIONS

CS may be a promising treatment strategy for some GC patients with PM who have responded to chemotherapy.

The Onset of In-Vivo Dehydration in Gas -Based Intraperitoneal Hyperthermia and Its Cytotoxic Effects on Colon Cancer Cells

Background

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) is an ongoing challenge in surgical oncology. Current therapeutic options, including intravenous and intraperitoneal (i.p.) chemotherapies display limited clinical efficacy, resulting in an overall poor prognosis in affected patients. Combined hyperthermia and dehydration induced by a high-flow, gas-based i.p. hyperthermic procedure could be a novel approach in PM treatment. Our study is the first to evaluate the therapeutic potential of i.p. dehydration, hyperthermia, as well as the combination of both mechanisms in an in-vivo setting.

Methods

For this study, three swine were subjected to diagnostic laparoscopy under a high-flow air stream at 48°, 49° and 50°Celsius (C). Hygrometry of the in- and outflow airstream was measured to calculate surface evaporation and i.p. dehydration. To analyze the effects of this concept, in vitro colon cancer cells (HT-29) were treated with hyperthermia and dehydration. Cytotoxicity and cell viability were measured at different time intervals. Additionally, structural changes of dehydrated cells were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy.

Results

According to our results, both dehydration and hyperthermia were cytotoxic to HT-29 cells. However, while dehydration reduced cell viability, hyperthermia did not. However, dehydration effects on cell viability were significantly increased when combined with hyperthermia (p<0.01).

Conclusions

Changes to the physiological milieu of the peritoneal cavity could significantly reduce PM. Therefore, limited dehydration of the abdominal cavity might be a feasible, additional tool in PM treatment. Further studies are required to investigate dehydration effects and their applicability in PM management.

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Nomogram for Colorectal Cancer Patients With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastasis

Purpose

Synchronous peritoneal metastasis (S-PM) is considered a poor prognostic factor for colorectal cancer (CRC) and there is no nomogram to predict the survival of these patients. In this study, we aimed to use a multicenter data to identify the factors associated with S-PM of CRC to construct a nomogram for predicting the overall survival (OS) of these patients.

Methods

CRC patients with S-PM from two medical centers were enrolled between September 2007 and June 2017. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with OS for the nomogram to predict the 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates in the development group. The concordance index (C-index), calibration plot, relative operating characteristic (ROC) curve with area under the curve (AUC) were calculated to evaluate the performance of the nomogram in both the development and an external validation group.

Results

277 CRC patients with S-PM in the development group and 68 patients in the validation group were eligible for this study. In multivariate analysis of development group, age, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), cytoreductive surgery (CRS), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and chemotherapy were independent variables for OS, based on which the nomogram was built. The C-index of the nomogram in the development and validation group was 0.701 (95% Cl, 0.666–0.736) and 0.716 (95% Cl, 0.622–0.810); demonstrating good discriminative ability. The calibration plots showed satisfactory consistency between actual observation and nomogram-predicted OS probabilities in the development and external validation group. The nomogram showed good predictive accuracy for 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates in both groups with AUC >0.70. An online dynamic webserver was also developed for increasing the ease of the nomogram.

Conclusions

We developed and validated a predictive nomogram with good discriminative and high accuracy to predict the OS in CRC patients with S-PM.

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of gastric cancer peritoneal metastases: an overview of common therapeutic regimens

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) have an incidence of 10-20% in patients with gastric cancer (GC), and even up to 40% in patients with UICC Stage III GC. Due to the aggressive characteristic of adenocarcinoma of the stomach, GC is the third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. For GC with PM, the treatment of choice is according to national and international guidelines systemic chemotherapy, combined with biologic therapy against specific receptor antigen in with overexpression, such as HER-2. Multimodal treatment regimens including intraperitoneal application of chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery (CRS) have been investigated and established all over the world. Driven by pharmacological studies and thoughts considering the increased benefits of cytotoxic agents used in the abdominal cavity, several drugs and drug combinations are widely used. In order to standardize treatment protocols, it is crucial to differentiate between normothermic and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC, HIPEC). The requirements of an ideal cytotoxic drug different obviously dependent on its application method. Because of their high molecular weight and lipophilic structure, taxanes, such as paclitaxel or docetaxel have a long intraperitoneal retention time and are commonly used in NIPEC, while platin derivates, such as carboplatin or oxaliplatin are known for their synergistic effect to heat and are chosen in HIPEC. This review aims to explore and summarize different intraperitoneal treatment regimens strictly evaluated by supporting evidence in an effort to consolidate many regimens to a few evidence-based treatment protocols that deserve further investigation and distribution. This analysis included all studies focusing on intraperitoneal chemotherapy: Phase II, Phase III trials and non-randomized retrospective trials of larger cohorts of patients with GC and established PM or risk of PM. Interestingly, the protocols for NIPEC are quite uniform, with less variation between the therapeutic components in contrast to the different HIPEC protocols. This difference might be explained by the divergent evolution of NIPEC and HIPEC, as the former exclusively originated in Japan, while HIPEC experienced a more multicentric evolution and distribution in the United States, Asia, Europe, and worldwide utilization today.

Intra-operative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer: a narrative review

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC) has long been regarded as the terminal disease, lacking of effective treatments. In recent 40 years, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), and early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), has been recommended as a preferred treatment option for some selected patients with GCPM. Intraperitoneal free cancer cells were recognized as the pathological cause of PM and the primary target for intraperitoneal chemotherapy. There were a lot of evidence demonstrating that HIPEC could effectively eradiate intraperitoneal free cancer cells and prolong overall survival in GCPM. However, there are still no standard HIPEC protocols. This review summarized the current HIPEC regimens used in GCPM from a literature search, trying to conclude the optimal HIPEC in GCPM, and indicate the future direction of HIPEC study. Moreover, the new data on the exploration of HIPEC in GCPM at Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University was shared. In conclusion, there was not enough evidence from publications and our own experience to conclude a recommended HIPEC regimen for GCPM. There is urgent need for standardizing HIPEC protocols worldwide. Accordingly, more international collaborations focusing on pharmacology and HIPEC-related parameters to generate high level evidence are essential.