Feasibility of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced peritoneal surface tumors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a complex treatment used in selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. HIPEC procedures are time and resource intensive. The primary aim of this analysis was to compare the experience of treating advanced abdominal tumors with CRS-HIPEC before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Patients included in this analysis received CRS-HIPEC at a single center during either a prepandemic (March 18, 2019-March 17, 2020) or pandemic (March 18, 2020-February 5, 2021) interval. A retrospective chart review was performed. RESULTS: Our analysis included 67 patients: 30 (45%) treated prepandemic and 37 (55%) treated during the pandemic. Median age at the time of operation was 58 years (interquartile range: [49-65]); 53% of patients were women. Patients treated during the pandemic presented with higher peritoneal cancer index (PCI) scores with 32% (n = 12) having a PCI > 20 at the time of surgery (p = 0.01). Five patients had delays in surgery due to the pandemic. Rates of overall postoperative morbidity, reoperation, and readmission were not different between the cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Despite presenting with more extensive disease, patients treated with CRS-HIPEC during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic had comparable perioperative outcomes to patients treated prepandemic.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery in colorectal carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short-term and long-term outcomes from the CHECK study - protocol for a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Up to one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer will develop peritoneal metastases, frequently without other districts' involvement. Despite the recent unsuccesses of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases treatment, the rationale in the prophylactic setting remains strong. Several clinical and pharmacokinetic data suggest that the efficacy of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is highest when the disease is microscopic. However, robust evidence demonstrating whether the addition of HIPEC for high-risk colorectal cancers offers better control of local recurrence is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised phase 3 trial comparing prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin, over standard surgical excision in patients with colorectal cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; 388 patients will be included in this study. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical colorectal resection, omentectomy, appendectomy, round ligament of the liver resection and bilateral adnexectomy) plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin and standard surgery in terms of local recurrence-free survival. The main secondary endpoints are disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The primary endpoint will be described with a cumulative incidence function and will be analysed with Grey test to take account of the competing risks. DFS and OS will be described with the Kaplan-Meier method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been evaluated by the Italian Medicines Agency, local ethics committees and will be submitted to the Ministry of Health to notify the start of the trial according to the regulation of trials on devices with CE mark/certification.The results will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, whatever the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03914820.

Debulking different Corona (SARS-CoV-2 delta, omicron, OC43) and Influenza (H1N1, H3N2) virus strains by plant viral trap proteins in chewing gums to decrease infection and transmission.

Because oral transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is 3-5 orders of magnitude higher than nasal transmission, we investigated debulking of oral viruses using viral trap proteins (CTB-ACE2, FRIL) expressed in plant cells, delivered through the chewing gum. In omicron nasopharyngeal (NP) samples, the microbubble count (based on N-antigen) was significantly reduced by 20 µg of FRIL (p < 0.0001) and 0.925 µg of CTB-ACE2 (p = 0.0001). Among 20 delta or omicron NP samples, 17 had virus load reduced below the detection level of spike protein in the RAPID assay, after incubation with the CTB-ACE2 gum powder. A dose-dependent 50% plaque reduction with 50-100 ng FRIL or 600-800 µg FRIL gum against Influenza strains H1N1, H3N2, and Coronavirus HCoV-OC43 was observed with both purified FRIL, lablab bean powder or gum. In electron micrographs, large/densely packed clumps of overlapping influenza particles and FRIL protein were observed. Chewing simulator studies revealed that CTB-ACE2 release was time/dose-dependent and release was linear up to 20 min chewing. Phase I/II placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial (IND 154897) is in progress to evaluate viral load in saliva before or after chewing CTB-ACE2/placebo gum. Collectively, this study advances the concept of chewing gum to deliver proteins to debulk oral viruses and decrease infection/transmission.

Debulking SARS-CoV-2 in saliva using angiotensin converting enzyme 2 in chewing gum to decrease oral virus transmission and infection.

To advance a novel concept of debulking virus in the oral cavity, the primary site of viral replication, virus-trapping proteins CTB-ACE2 were expressed in chloroplasts and clinical-grade plant material was developed to meet FDA requirements. Chewing gum (2 g) containing plant cells expressed CTB-ACE2 up to 17.2 mg ACE2/g dry weight (11.7% leaf protein), have physical characteristics and taste/flavor like conventional gums, and no protein was lost during gum compression. CTB-ACE2 gum efficiently (>95%) inhibited entry of lentivirus spike or VSV-spike pseudovirus into Vero/CHO cells when quantified by luciferase or red fluorescence. Incubation of CTB-ACE2 microparticles reduced SARS-CoV-2 virus count in COVID-19 swab/saliva samples by >95% when evaluated by microbubbles (femtomolar concentration) or qPCR, demonstrating both virus trapping and blocking of cellular entry. COVID-19 saliva samples showed low or undetectable ACE2 activity when compared with healthy individuals (2,582 versus 50,126 ΔRFU; 27 versus 225 enzyme units), confirming greater susceptibility of infected patients for viral entry. CTB-ACE2 activity was completely inhibited by pre-incubation with SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain, offering an explanation for reduced saliva ACE2 activity among COVID-19 patients. Chewing gum with virus-trapping proteins offers a general affordable strategy to protect patients from most oral virus re-infections through debulking or minimizing transmission to others.

Radiation-induced glioblastoma of the conus medullaris from radiation treatment of cervical cancer.

Radiation-induced spinal glioblastoma is an extremely rare disease with only four previously published reports in the literature. We report the fifth case, a 69-year-old woman who previously underwent treatment with brachytherapy for cervical cancer, and thereafter presented with neurologic deficits from a conus medullaris tumour. Biopsy and histopathology confirm glioblastoma, not otherwise specified. Treatment of spinal glioblastoma consists of surgery, either biopsy or excision and chemoradiation. However, results are still unsatisfactory and prognosis remains poor.

Maintaining surgical care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative cohort study at a tertiary gynecological cancer centre.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the cornerstone of gynecological cancer management, but inpatient treatment may expose both patients and healthcare staff to COVID-19 infections. Plans to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have been implemented widely, but few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of these plans in maintaining safe surgical care delivery. AIM: To evaluate the effects of mitigating plans implemented on the delivery of gynecological cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A comparative cohort study of patients treated in a high-volume tertiary gyneoncological centre in the United Kingdom. Prospectively-recorded consecutive operations performed and early peri-operative outcomes during the same calendar periods (January-August) in 2019 and 2020 were compared. RESULTS: In total, 585 operations were performed (296 in 2019; 289 in 2020). There was no significant difference in patient demographics. Types of surgery performed were different (p = 0.034), with fewer cytoreductive surgeries for ovarian cancer and laparoscopic procedures (p = 0.002) in 2020. There was no difference in intra-operative complication rates, critical care admission rates or length of stay. One patient had confirmed COVID-19 infection (0.4%). The 30-day post-operative complication rates were significantly higher in 2020 than in 2019 (58 [20.1%] versus 32 [10.8%]; p = 0.002) for both minor and major complications. This increase, primarily from March 2020 onwards, coincided with the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining surgical throughput with meticulous and timely planning is feasible during the COVID-19 pandemic but this was associated with an increase in post-operative complications due to a multitude of reasons.

Evidence-Based Strategies for the Treatment of Peritoneal Malignancies during Health Care Resource Restriction: The COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has put enormous pressure on hospital resources, and has affected all aspects of patient care. As operative volumes decrease, cancer surgeries must be triaged and prioritized with careful thought and attention to ensure maximal benefit for the maximum number of patients. Peritoneal malignancies present a unique challenge, as surgical management can be resource intensive, but patients have limited non-surgical treatment options. This review summarizes current data on outcomes and resource utilization to help inform decision-making and case prioritization in times of constrained health care resources. Methods: A rapid literature review was performed, examining surgical and non-surgical outcomes data for peritoneal malignancies. Narrative data synthesis was cross-referenced with relevant societal guidelines. Peritoneal malignancy surgeons and medical oncologists reviewed recommendations to establish a national perspective on case triage and mitigating treatment strategies. Results and Conclusions: Triage of peritoneal malignancies during this time of restricted health care resource is nuanced and requires multidisciplinary discussion with consideration of individual patient factors. Prioritization should be given to patients where delay may compromise resectability of disease, and where alternative treatment options are lacking. Mitigating strategies such as systemic chemotherapy and/or surgical deferral may be utilized with close surveillance for disease stability or progression, which may affect surgical urgency. Unique hospital capacity, and ability to manage the complex post-operative course for these patients must also be considered to ensure patient and system needs are aligned.

Survival outcomes after delayed cytoreduction surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Interval cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a well-recognized treatment alternative to primary debulking surgery in the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer where patient and/or disease factors prevent complete macroscopic disease resection to be achieved. More recently, the strain of the global COVID-19 pandemic on hospital resources has forced many units to alter the timing of interval surgery and extend the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles. In order to support this paradigm shift and provide more accurate counseling during these unprecedented times, we investigated the survival outcomes in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients with the intent of maximal cytoreduction following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with respect to timing of surgery and degree of cytoreduction. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients aged 18 years and above with FIGO (2014) stage III/IV epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the intention of interval cytoreduction surgery between January 2008 and December 2017 was conducted. Overall and progression-free survival outcomes were analyzed and compared with patients who only received chemotherapy. Outcome measures were correlated with the number of neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and amount of residual disease following surgery. RESULTS: Six hundred and seventy-one patients (median age 67 (range 20-91) years) were included in the study with 572 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery and 99 patients with chemotherapy only. There was no difference in the proportion of patients in whom complete cytoreduction was achieved based on number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (2-4 cycles: 67.7%, n=337/498); ≥5 cycles: 62.2%, n=46/74). Patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a median 5-year progression-free and overall survival of 24 and 38 months, respectively. No significant difference in overall survival between surgical groups was observed (interval cytoreduction: 41 months vs delayed cytoreduction: 43 months, p=0.52). Those who achieved complete cytoreduction to R0 (no macroscopic disease) had a significant median overall survival advantage compared with those with any macroscopic residual disease (R0: 49-51 months vs R<1: 22-39 months, p<0.001 vs R≥1: 23-26 months, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcomes do not appear to be worse for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy if cytoreduction surgery is delayed beyond three cycles. In advanced epithelial ovarian cancer patients the imperative to achieve complete surgical cytoreduction remains gold standard, irrespective of surgical timing, for best survival benefit.

[Guidelines for surgical management of gynaecological cancer during pandemic COVID-19 period - FRANCOGYN group for the CNGOF]. / Prise en charge chirurgicale des cancers gynécologiques en période de pandémie COVID-19 ­ Recommandations du Groupe FRANCOGYN pour le CNGOF.

INTRODUCTION: Recommendations for the management of patients with gynecological cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic period. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Recommendations based on the consensus conference model. RESULTS: In the case of a COVID-19 positive patient, surgical management should be postponed for at least 15 days. For cervical cancer, the place of surgery must be re-evaluated in relation to radiotherapy and Radio-Chemotherapy-Concomitant and the value of lymph node staging surgeries must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. For advanced ovarian cancers, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy should be favored even if primary cytoreduction surgery could be envisaged. It is lawful not to offer hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during a COVID-19 pandemic. In the case of patients who must undergo interval surgery, it is possible to continue the chemotherapy and to offer surgery after 6 cycles of chemotherapy. For early stage endometrial cancer, in case of low and intermediate preoperative ESMO risk, hysterectomy with bilateral annexectomy associated with a sentinel lymph node procedure should be favored. It is possible to consider postponing surgery for 1 to 2 months in low-risk endometrial cancers (FIGO Ia stage on MRI and grade 1-2 endometrioid cancer on endometrial biopsy). For high ESMO risk, it ispossible to favor the MSKCC algorithm (combining PET-CT and sentinel lymph node biopsy) in order to omit pelvic and lumbar-aortic lymphadenectomies. CONCLUSION: During COVID-19 pandemic, patients suffering from cancer should not lose life chance, while limiting the risks associated with the virus.