Clinical Significance of Circulating Tumor Cells in Epithelial Appendiceal Neoplasms with Peritoneal Metastases.

Appendiceal tumors are uncommon and, at times, discovered incidentally during histological examination. The histopathological classification of the disease is complex and has generated some controversy. The analysis of circulating tumor cells can be used for the early detection of metastatic potential. The aim of the present study was to examine the prognostic value of circulating tumor cells in patients with appendiceal tumors and peritoneal metastases. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine CTCs in appendiceal tumors. We performed a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy between 2015 and 2019 at a HIPEC referral center. In total, 31 patients were included in the analysis, and circulating tumor cells were detected in 15 patients (48%). CTC positivity was not associated with overall or recurrence-free survival, nor was it correlated with PCI score or histopathological grading. Surprisingly, however, CTCs were found in almost half the patients. The presence or quantities of these cells did not, on their own, predict systemic metastatic potential during the observed time, and they did not appear to significantly correlate with the oncological outcomes recorded.

Secondary cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for recurrent colorectal peritoneal metastases.

Background: Secondary treatment of recurrent colorectal peritoneal metastases after previous cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is poorly investigated. Objectives: To evaluate the overall survival outcome of secondary (repeat) CRS + HIPEC compared to palliative treatment in recurrent peritoneal disease. Methods: Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with an index CRS + HIPEC and subsequently having recurrent peritoneal disease were identified from the prospective Swedish national HIPEC registry. Patients were divided into interventional group (secondary CRS + HIPEC) or palliative group. Multivariable logistic regression, propensity-score matching, and survival outcomes were calculated. Results: Among 575 patients who underwent complete CRS between 2010 and 2021, 208 (36 %) were diagnosed with a subsequent recurrent peritoneal disease. Forty-two patients (20 %) were offered secondary CRS + HIPEC. Propensity-score matching of secondary interventional cases with palliative cases succeeded in 88 % (n = 37) in which female sex, lower peritoneal cancer index at index surgery, longer disease-free interval, and absence of extra-peritoneal metastases were identified as the most relevant matching covariates. Median OS from date of recurrence was 38 months (95%CI 30-58) in the interventional group and 19 months (95%CI: 15-24) in the palliative group (HR 0.35 95%CI: 0.20-0.63, p = 0.0004). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results. As reference, the median OS from index CRS + HIPEC in the whole colorectal registry (n = 575) was 41 months (95%CI: 38-45). Conclusion: After matching for relevant factors, the hazard ratio for death was significantly reduced in patients who were offered a secondary CRS + HIPEC procedure for recurrent peritoneal disease. Selection bias is inherent, but survival outcomes were comparable to those achieved after the initial procedure.

No Indication for Routine Resection of Surgical Scars during Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Careful macroscopic assessment of surgical scars is needed to avoid routine scar resection during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal metastases (PM). This study aimed to analyze the correlation between macroscopically suspected and microscopically confirmed scar metastases (SMs), and to analyze the prognostic impact of not undergoing routine scar resection. METHOD: All patients with previous surgery, treated with CRS and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, for colorectal PM or pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), at Uppsala University Hospital in 2013-2021, were included. Macroscopic SMs in surgical reports were compared with histopathological analyses. RESULTS: In total, 227 patients were included. Among colorectal PM patients (n = 156), SM was macroscopically suspected in 41 (26%) patients, and 63 (40%) underwent scar resection. SM was confirmed in 19 (30%). Among patients with macroscopic suspicion, 45% had confirmed SM (positive predictive value, PPV). A total of 1 of 23 (4%) patients with no macroscopic suspicion had SM (negative predictive value, NPV = 96%). Among the PMP patients (n = 71), SM was macroscopically suspected in 13 (18%), and 28 (39%) underwent scar resection, of whom 12 (43%) had SM. The PPV was 77%. Occult SM was found in 1 of 14 (NPV = 93%). Not undergoing routine scar resection did not affect recurrence-free survival (RFS, p = 0.2) or overall survival (OS, p = 0.1) in colorectal PM patients or PMP patients (RFS p = 0.7, OS p = 0.7). CONCLUSION: Occult SM is uncommon and scar resection does not affect RFS or OS. Therefore, macroscopically benign-appearing scars can be left without resection, though resection should be performed upon suspicion or uncertainty.

Omental metastases in patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei or colorectal peritoneal metastases - is routine omentectomy justified?

BACKGROUND: The greater omentum is routinely resected during cytoreductive surgery (CRS), but few studies have analyzed the rationale behind this. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of omental metastases (OM) and the correlation between macroscopically suspected and microscopically confirmed OM, in patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) or colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM). METHOD: All patients without previous omentectomy, treated with initial CRS and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for PMP or colorectal PM, at Uppsala University Hospital in 2013-2021, were included. Macroscopic OM in surgical reports was compared with histopathological analyses. RESULTS: In all, 276 patients were included. In those with PMP, 112 (98%) underwent omentectomy and 67 (59%) had macroscopic suspicion of OM. In 5 (4%) patients, the surgeon was uncertain. Histopathology confirmed OM in 81 (72%). In patients with macroscopic suspicion, 96% had confirmed OM (positive predictive value, PPV). In patients with no suspicion, 24% had occult OM (negative predictive value, NPV = 76%). In patients with colorectal PM, 156 (96%) underwent omentectomy and 97 (60%) had macroscopic suspicion. For 5 (3%) patients, the surgeon was uncertain. OM was microscopically confirmed in 90 (58%). PPV was 85% and NPV was 89%. The presence of OM was a univariate risk factor for death in PMP (HR 3.62, 95%CI 1.08-12.1) and colorectal PM (HR 1.67, 95%CI 1.07-2.60), but not in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: OM was common and there was a high risk of missing occult OM in both PMP and colorectal PM. These results support the practice of routine omentectomy during CRS.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases (pmCRC) in a large international data set of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with pmCRC from 39 centres who underwent cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC between 1991 and 2018 were selected and compared for the HIPEC protocols received-oxaliplatin-HIPEC versus mitomycin-HIPEC. Following analysis of crude data, propensity-score matching (PSM) and Cox-proportional hazard modelling were performed. Outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and the HIPEC dose-response effects (high versus low dose, dose intensification and double drug protocols) on OS, RFS and 90-day morbidity. Furthermore, the impact of the treatment time period was assessed. RESULTS: Of 2760 patients, 2093 patients were included. Median OS was 43 months (95% c.i. 41 to 46 months) with a median RFS of 12 months (95% c.i. 12 to 13 months). The oxaliplatin-HIPEC group had an OS of 47 months (95% c.i. 42 to 53 months) versus 39 months (95% c.i. 36 to 43 months) in the mitomycin-HIPEC group (P = 0.002), aHR 0.77, 95% c.i. 0.67 to 0.90, P < 0.001. The OS benefit persisted after PSM of the oxaliplatin-HIPEC group and mitomycin-HIPEC group (48 months (95% c.i. 42 to 59 months) versus 40 months (95% c.i. 37 to 44 months)), P < 0.001, aHR 0.78 (95% c.i. 0.65 to 0.94), P = 0.009. Similarly, matched RFS was significantly higher for oxaliplatin-HIPEC versus others (13 months (95% c.i. 12 to 15 months) versus 11 months (95% c.i. 10 to 12 months, P = 0.02)). High-dose mitomycin-HIPEC protocols had similar OS compared to oxaliplatin-HIPEC. HIPEC dose intensification within each protocol resulted in improved survival. Oxaliplatin + irinotecan-HIPEC resulted in the most improved OS (61 months (95% c.i. 51 to 101 months)). Ninety-day mortality in both crude and PSM analysis was worse for mitomycin-HIPEC. There was no change in treatment effect depending on the analysed time period. CONCLUSIONS: Oxaliplatin-based HIPEC provided better outcomes compared to mitomycin-based HIPEC. High-dose mitomycin-HIPEC was similar to oxaliplatin-HIPEC. The 90-day mortality difference favours the oxaliplatin-HIPEC group. A trend for dose-response between low- and high-dose HIPEC was reported.

Efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in colorectal cancer: A phase I and III open label randomized controlled registry-based clinical trial protocol.

Standard treatment for patient with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer is cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In recent years, the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC has been challenged. An intensified HIPEC (oxaliplatin+irinotecan) in combination with early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) has shown increased recurrence-free survival in retrospective studies. The aim of this trial is to develop a new HIPEC/EPIC regimen and evaluate its effect on morbidity, oncological outcome, and quality-of-life (QoL). This study is designed as a combined phase I/III multicenter randomized trial (RCT) of patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer eligible for CRS-HIPEC. An initial phase I dose escalation study, designed as a 3+3 stepwise escalation, will determine the maximum tolerable dose of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) as 1-day EPIC, enrolling a total of 15-30 patients in 5 dose levels. In the phase III efficacy study, patients are randomly assigned intraoperatively to either the standard treatment with oxaliplatin HIPEC (control arm) or oxaliplatin/irinotecan-HIPEC in combination with single dose of 1-day 5-FU EPIC (experimental arm). 5-FU is administered intraoperatively after CRS-HIPEC and closure of the abdomen. The primary endpoint is 12-month recurrence-free survival. Secondary endpoints include 5-year overall survival, 5-year recurrence-free survival (registry based), postoperative complications, and QoL up to 3 years after study treatment. This phase I/III trial aims to identify a more effective treatment of colorectal peritoneal metastases by combination of HIPEC and EPIC.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Metastases from Colorectal Cancer-An Overview of Current Status and Future Perspectives.

Peritoneal metastases (PM) are observed in approximately 8% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer, either synchronously or metachronously during follow-up. PM often manifests as the sole site of metastasis. PM is associated with a poor prognosis and typically shows resistance to systemic chemotherapy. Consequently, there has been a search for alternative treatment strategies. This review focuses on the global evolution of the combined approach involving cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the management of PM. It encompasses accepted clinical guidelines, principles for patient selection, surgical and physiological considerations, biomarkers, pharmacological protocols, and treatment outcomes. Additionally, it integrates the relevant literature and findings from previous studies. The role of CRS and HIPEC, in conjunction with other therapies such as neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, is discussed, along with the management of patients presenting with oligometastatic disease. Furthermore, potential avenues for future development in this field are explored.

The effect of cognitive behavioral therapy on chemotherapy-induced side effects and immune function in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) was one of the most widely diagnosed cancers in the United States in 2021. CRC patients may experience significant psychological stress and are susceptible to depression and anxiety. Previous studies have shown that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can reduce fatigue and improve quality of life among breast cancer patients. However, as a non-pharmaceutical treatment, it remains unclear whether CBT improves chemotherapy-induced side effects and immune function in CRC patients. In this study, we will conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) among CRC patients undergoing chemotherapy to determine whether CBT can reduce the side effects of chemotherapy and improve the immune function of CRC patients. Methods: The study will be a single-center RCT. CRC patients undergoing chemotherapy will receive either eight sessions of group-based CBT (every 2-3 weeks) or usual care (usual oncology care). Each participant will undergo assessments at baseline (T0), immediately post-intervention (T1), 3 months post-intervention (T2), and 6 months post-intervention (T3). The primary outcome will include chemotherapy-induced side effects in CRC patients. The secondary outcome will be immune function (measured by levels of inflammatory cytokines). Other outcomes will include the levels of tumor markers, assessments of psychological status (perception of stress, depression and anxiety, self-efficacy, sleep quality, quality of life, social support condition, and cognitive function), and necessary laboratory examinations (biochemical index and blood cell counts) among CRC patients undergoing chemotherapy. Discussion: Our study will provide clinical evidence regarding whether CBT should be generalized in clinical treatment and the extent to which CBT reduces chemotherapy-induced side effects for CRC patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT04741308.

External validation of prognostic scores and comparison of predictive accuracy for patients with colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases considered for cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prognostic scores are developed to facilitate the selection of patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRPM) for treatment with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC). Three prominent prognostic scores are the Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS), the Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Prognostic Surgical Score (COMPASS), and the modified COloREctal-Pc (mCOREP). We externally validate these scores and compare their predictive accuracy. METHODS: Data from consecutive CRPM patients who underwent CRS/IPC from 1996 to 2018 was used to externally validate COMPASS, PSDSS, and mCOREP. Analysis evaluated the efficacy of each score in predicting (1) open-close laparotomy-those found at laparotomy to not be eligible for curative intent CRS/IPC, (2) surgical futility-those who underwent open-close laparotomy, palliative debulking surgery, or had an overall survival of less than 12 months, and (3) overall and recurrence-free survival (OS, RFS). RESULTS: Prognostic scores were calculated for the 174-patient external validation cohort. COMPASS was most accurate in predicting open-close laparotomy, futile surgery, and survival (OS and RFS). Area under the curve (AUC) for open-close prediction was 0.78 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.68-0.87), representing useful discrimination. However, AUC for futility prediction was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.71), and C-statistic for OS was 0.65 indicating only possibly helpful discrimination. C-statistic for RFS was 0.59 indicating poor discrimination. CONCLUSION: While COMPASS showed the best statistical behavior, accuracy for several clinically relevant outcomes remains low, and thus applicability to clinical practice limited.

Perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases: A global propensity score matched study.

Background: There is a paucity of studies evaluating perioperative systemic chemotherapy in conjunction with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRCPM). The aim was to evaluate neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant systemic therapy in CRCPM. Methods: Patients with CRCPM from 39 treatment centres globally from January 1, 1991, to December 31, 2018, who underwent CRS+HIPEC were identified and stratified according to neoadjuvant/adjuvant use. Crude data analysis, propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox-proportional hazard modelling was performed. Findings: Of 2093 patients, 1613 were included in neoadjuvant crude evaluation with 708 in the PSM cohort (354 patients/arm). In the adjuvant evaluation, 1176 patients were included in the crude cohort with 778 in the PSM cohort (389 patients/arm). The median overall survival (OS) in the PSM cohort receiving no neoadjuvant vs neoadjuvant therapy was 37.0 months (95% CI: 32.6-42.7) vs 34.7 months (95% CI: 31.2-38.8, HR 1.08 95% CI: 0.88-1.32, p = 0.46). The median OS in the PSM cohort receiving no adjuvant therapy vs adjuvant therapy was 37.0 months (95% CI: 32.9-41.8) vs 45.7 months (95% CI: 38.8-56.2, HR 0.79 95% CI: 0.64-0.97, p = 0.022). Recurrence-free survival did not differ in the neoadjuvant evaluation but differed in the adjuvant evaluation - HR 1.04 (95% CI: 0.87-1.25, p = 0.66) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70-0.98, p = 0.03), respectively. Multivariable Cox-proportional hazard modelling in the crude cohorts showed hazard ratio 1.08 (95% CI: 0.92-1.26, p = 0.37) for administering neoadjuvant therapy and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.72-1.03, p = 0.095) for administering adjuvant therapy. Interpretation: Neoadjuvant therapy did not confer a benefit to patients undergoing CRS+HIPEC for CRCPM, whereas adjuvant therapy was associated with a benefit in this retrospective setting. Funding: None.

Surgical treatment of rectovaginal fistula-predictors of outcome and effects on quality of life.

PURPOSE: To determine the results after rectovaginal fistula (RVF) repair and find predictors of outcome. Primary objective was fistula healing. Secondary outcomes were morbidity and patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHOD: An observational study of 55 women who underwent RVF repair including both local procedures and tissue transposition 2003-2018 was performed. Baseline patient and fistula characteristics were registered, combined with a prospective HRQoL follow-up and a general questionnaire describing fistula symptoms. RESULTS: Healing rate after index surgery was 25.5% (n = 14) but the final healing rate was 67.3% (n = 37). Comparing the etiologies, traumatic fistulas (iatrogenic and obstetric) had the highest healing rates after index surgery (n = 11, 45.9%) and after repeated operations at final follow-up (n = 22, 91.7%) compared with fistulas of inflammatory fistulas (Crohn's disease, cryptoglandular infection, and anastomotic leakage) that had inferior healing rates after both index surgery (n = 7, 7.1%) and at final follow-up (n = 13, 46.4%). Fistulas of the category others (radiation damage and unknown etiology) included a small amount of patients with intermediate results at both index surgery (n = 1, 33.3%) and healing rate at last follow-up (n = 2, 66.7%). The differences were statistically significant for both index surgery (p = 0.004) and at final follow-up (p = 0.001). Unhealed patients scored lower than both healed patients and the normal population in 6/8 Rand-36 domains, but the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Most traumatic rectovaginal fistulas closed after repeated surgery whereas inflammatory fistulas had a poor prognosis. Low healing rates after local repairs suggest that tissue transfer might be indicated more early in the treatment process. Unhealed fistulas were associated with reduced quality of life. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT05006586.

Validating the PSOGI classification of peritoneal disease from non-carcinoid epithelial appendiceal neoplasms in the curative and palliative setting: an observational retrospective study.

Background: Few studies on long-term survival have been published since the new updated pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) classification was published in 2016. The aim was to investigate long-term survival according to the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) classification and compare prognostic factors. Methods: From Uppsala University Hospital, consecutive patients referred for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) from 2004 to 2017 with peritoneal disease from non-carcinoid mucinous epithelial appendiceal neoplasms were included in the study. The peritoneal disease was divided into four groups: mucin only, low-grade mucinous carcinoma peritonei (MCP-1), high-grade (MCP-2), and high-grade with signet ring cells (MCP-3). Survival curves were rendered, and prognostic factors were compared. Results: The study included 223 patients: 36 with mucin only, 112 with MCP-1, 70 with MCP-2, and 5 with MCP-3. Thirty-eight patients had a palliative debulking or open/close procedure. The 5- and 10-year overall survival was 97% and 97% for mucin only, 83% and 70% for MCP-1, 69% and 49% for MCP-2, with no patients still under follow-up after 5 years in the MCP-3 group. In a multivariable analysis, completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score 2-3 and PSOGI class MCP-3 were significantly associated with lower survival. The 5-year overall survival in the palliative setting was 40% vs. 44% (MCP-1 vs. MCP-2, P>0.05) with median survival 51 vs. 53 months, respectively. Conclusions: The PSOGI classification of PMP provides a solid differentiation of prognostic groups after CRS/HIPEC treatment, but not in the palliative setting.

An International Registry of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis from Appendiceal Goblet Cell Carcinoma Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Peritoneal carcinomatosis from appendiceal goblet cell carcinoma (A-GCC) is a rare and aggressive form of appendiceal tumor. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intra peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) was reported as an interesting alternative regarding survival compared to surgery without HIPEC and/or systemic chemotherapy. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of CRS and HIPEC for patients presenting A-GCC through an international registry. METHODS: A prospective multicenter international database was retrospectively searched to identify all patients with A-GCC tumor and peritoneal metastases who underwent CRS and HIPEC through the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI). The post-operative complications, long-term results, and principal prognostic factors were analyzed. RESULTS: The analysis included 83 patients. After a median follow-up of 47 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 34.6 months. The 3- and 5-year OS was 48.5% and 35.7%, respectively. Patients who underwent complete macroscopic CRS had a significantly better survival than those treated with incomplete CRS. The 5-year OS was 44% and 0% for patients who underwent complete, and incomplete CRS, respectively (HR 9.65, p < 0.001). Lymph node involvement and preoperative chemotherapy were also predictive of a worse prognosis. There were 3 postoperative deaths, and 30% of the patients had major complications. CONCLUSION: CRS and HIPEC may increase long-term survival in selected patients with peritoneal metastases of A-GCC origin, especially when complete CRS is achieved. Ideally, randomized control trials or more retrospective data are needed to confirm CRS and HIPEC as the gold standard in this pathology.

Severe pulmonary complications after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy are common and contribute to decreased overall survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Extensive abdominal surgery is associated with the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. This study aims to explore the incidence and risk factors for developing postoperative pulmonary complications after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and to analyze how these complications affect overall survival. METHODS: Data were collected on 417 patients undergoing surgery between 2007 and2017 at Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden. Postoperative pulmonary complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system where Grade ≥ 3 was considered a severe complication. A logistic regression analysis was used to analyze risk factors for postoperative pulmonary complications and a Cox proportional hazards model to assess impact on survival. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients (17%) developed severe postoperative pulmonary complications. Risk factors were full thickness diaphragmatic injury and/or diaphragmatic resection [OR 5.393, 95% CI 2.924-9.948, p = < 0.001]. Severe postoperative pulmonary complications, in combination with non-pulmonary complications, contributed to decreased overall survival [HR 2.285, 95% CI 1.232-4.241, p = 0.009]. CONCLUSIONS: Severe postoperative pulmonary complications were common and contributed to decreased overall survival. Full thickness diaphragmatic injury and/or diaphragmatic resection were the main risk factors. This finding emphasizes the need for further research on the mechanisms behind pulmonary complications and their association with mortality.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal and appendiceal peritoneal metastases: lessons learned from PRODIGE 7.

The treatment for peritoneal metastases from appendiceal, colon and rectal cancer (MO1) has relied on cytoreductive surgery (CRS) to remove all visible evidence of disease plus a perioperative chemotherapy for the entire abdomen to eliminate microscopic residual disease. Using the results obtained from the PRODIGE 7 randomized controlled trial, methodological issues were discussed and possible improvements to the hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with oxaliplatin were sought. Possible methodological and pharmacologic flaws were identified. Several methodological flaws included the sample size, cross-over option, neoadjuvant chemotherapy use and timing of the peritoneal disease evaluation. The sample size issue raised the question of what the minimal clinically relevant benefit we want in future trials. Neoadjuvant FOLFOX may have induced acquired drug resistance to oxaliplatin. Several pharmacological issues were identified including limited 5-fluorouracil exposure as well as limited oxaliplatin peritoneal exposure time. Insufficient 5-fluorouracil accompanied the oxaliplatin as only a bolus dose was used and continuous 5-FU infusion has previously been an integral part of oxaliplatin treatment. Finally, only approximately one-half of the oxaliplatin entered body tissues or tumor. Three suggestions from the lessons learned from a critique of PRODIGE 7 were offered as adjustments to the HIPEC protocol. The Efficacy of HIPEC, a perioperative FOLFOX or a return to HIPEC with mitomycin C were described.

Sequential postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases: a narrative review.

Sequential postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (SPIC) is a chemotherapy abdominal infusion given as a postoperative adjuvant treatment for 6 months after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal surface malignancies. It has most commonly been used in conjunction with ovarian cancer where the SPIC treatment has been integrated with adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. This review investigates the role of SPIC in the setting of colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases. The focus is on the CRS+SPIC combination treatment with no systemic chemotherapy component. Several cohort studies, several comparative studies, and one randomized trial have been reported with several important endpoints. The following aspects will be covered in this review: overall survival, disease-free survival, morbidity, quality-of-life, and cost-effectiveness. In comparison to systemic chemotherapy alone for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases, CRS+SPIC is superior concerning overall survival, has no difference in morbidity, is similar in quality-of-life, and SPIC is cost-effective. In comparison to HIPEC, results are conflicting in multivariate analysis; but in a univariate analysis HIPEC (most often combined with systemic adjuvant therapy) appears superior to SPIC alone (no systemic component). The future of SPIC is uncertain. However, a combination of HIPEC and SPIC ± a systemic chemotherapy component is a possible direction to explore further.

Oxaliplatin-based hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy with single drug versus multiple drug treatment for colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term survival for selected patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC) is possible when treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The objective of this study was to compare three different oxaliplatin-based (OX)-HIPEC regimens. Primary end-point was disease-free survival (DFS), and secondary endpoints, morbidity and overall survival (OS). METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all patients with colorectal PM treated with CRS and HIPEC between 2004 and 2015 from the prospectively maintained Uppsala HIPEC database. One hundred and thirty-three patients were identified. Three HIPEC regimens were included: OX-HIPEC, OX-HIPEC + post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and oxaliplatin-irinotecan-based (OXIRI)-HIPEC. Multivariable Cox regression for DFS was performed. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients received OX-HIPEC, 24 patients received OX-HIPEC + 5-FU EPIC, and 48 patients received OXIRI-HIPEC. The DFS for the OX-HIPEC group was 10.5 months, OX-HIPEC + EPIC 11.9 months, and OXIRI-HIPEC 13.4 months (OX-HIPEC vs. OXIRI HIPEC, P=0.049). The morbidity and OS did not differ between the groups. In the multivariable analysis, low peritoneal cancer index (PCI), absence of liver metastases, low completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score, and multiple drug (EPIC or OXIRI) HIPEC regimen were independent prognostic factors for DFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed improved DFS with an intensification of HIPEC by adding irinotecan or EPIC compared to oxaliplatin alone without an increase in morbidity or mortality.

The impact of PRODIGE 7 on the current worldwide practice of CRS-HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases: A web-based survey and 2021 statement by Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI).

INTRODUCTION: The PRODIGE 7-trial investigated the additional value of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The results of PRODIGE 7 were presented at the 2018 ASCO meeting showing that 30 min oxaliplatin-based HIPEC did not improve overall survival. The current study investigated the impact of PRODIGE 7 on the worldwide practice of CRS and HIPEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CRS-HIPEC experts from 19 countries were invited through the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) to complete an online survey concerning the current CRS-HIPEC practice in their hospital and country, and were asked to appraise the effect of PRODIGE 7. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 18/19 experts. Although their personal opinions of CRS-HIPEC were barely influenced by PRODIGE 7, they reported a substantial impact on daily practice. This included a switch towards Mitomycin-C based HIPEC-regimens and prolongation of HIPEC perfusion time, a reduction in the number of referrals from non-HIPEC centers, a reduction in national consensus, the removal of HIPEC from national guidelines, and a reduced reimbursement rate. CONCLUSION: The PRODIGE 7 has had a major impact on the practice of CRS-HIPEC for CPM worldwide. HIPEC remains an attractive option with potential for control and eradication of disease and further studies into the optimal HIPEC-regimen are urgently needed. Meanwhile, given the complexity of the treatment of patients with CPM, and the proven benefits of optimal CRS, referral of patients with potentially resectable CPM to expert centers is recommended whilst the precise role of HIPEC is further evaluated.