Pub Date : 2020-08-04eCollection Date: 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2020-0105
Ravi J Chokshi, Jin K Kim, Jimmy Patel, Joseph B Oliver, Omar Mahmoud
Objectives: The impact of insurance status on oncological outcome in patients undergoing cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is poorly understood.
Methods: Retrospective study on 31 patients having undergone 36 CRS-HIPEC at a single institution (safety-net hospital) between 2012 and 2018. Patients were categorized as insured or underinsured. Demographics and perioperative events were compared. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).
Results: A total of 20 patients were underinsured and 11 were insured. There were less gynecologic malignancies in the underinsured (p=0.02). On univariate analysis, factors linked to poor survival included gastrointestinal (p=0.01) and gynecologic malignancies (p=0.046), treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p=0.03), CC1 (p=0.02), abdominal wall resection (p=0.01) and Clavien-Dindo 3-4 (p=0.01). Treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and abdominal wall resections, but not insurance status, were independently associated with OS (p=0.01, p=0.02 respectively). However, at the end of follow-up, six patients were alive in the insured group vs. zero in the underinsured group.
Conclusions: In this small, exploratory study, there was no statistical difference in OS between insured and underinsured patients after CRS-HIPEC. However, long-term survivors were observed only in the insured group.
{"title":"Impact of insurance status on overall survival after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC).","authors":"Ravi J Chokshi, Jin K Kim, Jimmy Patel, Joseph B Oliver, Omar Mahmoud","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0105","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The impact of insurance status on oncological outcome in patients undergoing cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective study on 31 patients having undergone 36 CRS-HIPEC at a single institution (safety-net hospital) between 2012 and 2018. Patients were categorized as insured or underinsured. Demographics and perioperative events were compared. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 20 patients were underinsured and 11 were insured. There were less gynecologic malignancies in the underinsured (p=0.02). On univariate analysis, factors linked to poor survival included gastrointestinal (p=0.01) and gynecologic malignancies (p=0.046), treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p=0.03), CC1 (p=0.02), abdominal wall resection (p=0.01) and Clavien-Dindo 3-4 (p=0.01). Treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and abdominal wall resections, but not insurance status, were independently associated with OS (p=0.01, p=0.02 respectively). However, at the end of follow-up, six patients were alive in the insured group vs. zero in the underinsured group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this small, exploratory study, there was no statistical difference in OS between insured and underinsured patients after CRS-HIPEC. However, long-term survivors were observed only in the insured group.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0105","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38752202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-19eCollection Date: 2020-06-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2020-0117
Marc Pocard, Marc A Reymond
Prof. Jimmy So recently presented the results of the Extensive Peritoneal Lavage after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer (EXPEL) study at the Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2020 (ASCO GI) in San Francisco [1]. The EXPEL trial is a prospective randomized, high-quality surgical study evaluating the potential benefit of peritoneal lavage after surgical resection of the stomach. The trial involved 800 patients from 22 hospitals from Korea, China, Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore. Patients with cT3, T4 stomach cancer undergoing curative resection were randomized to surgery alone (control group, n = 402 patients) or surgery followed by lavage of the peritoneal cavity with 10 L of saline solution (test group, n = 398 patients). There was no difference in the 3-year cumulative incidence of recurrence between the two groups. The rate of adverse events was higher in the test group (RR= 1.58, P = 0.019). The EXPEL study is not the first study failing to show a benefit of intraperitoneal therapies. Since 2018, the community of peritoneal surgeons is collecting negative results with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in colorectal cancer, both in the prophylactic and in the therapeutic setting [2, 3]. Positive results talk louder than negative studies. They are more appealing to physicians and get broader coverage. But does that mean that peritoneal surgeons should be discouraged from pursuing a fruitless path? Or might these negative studies give them valuable insights into where to look next? Many comments have been made regarding the failure of the French PRODIGE 7 randomized controlled trial examining an additional benefit of HIPEC over cytoreductive surgery alone in patients with peritoneal metastasis of colon cancer [4–6]. The PRODIGE 7 trial showed a remarkable overall survival of around 41months in both groups, and the control group (surgery alone) performed much better than expected. Thus, the additional effect of HIPEC, if any, was too small to be detected with the sample size available. Moreover, the HIPEC effect, if any, was erased by the increased postoperative morbidity in the test group. The reasons for these repeated, unexpected failures of intraperitoneal therapies in clinical trials might differ between trials, but some lessons can be learned for all of them. The first lesson is methodological and might appear self-evident. Medical research does not start with Phase-3 trials. Peritoneal surgeons should first go back to the laboratory to explore new approaches such as advanced drug delivery systems, nanoparticles, carrier solutions, and others. Only a few of these approaches will go successfully through the preclinical development steps and will reach clinical testing in human patients. These new approaches should then be validated step by step in welldesigned Phase-I and (controlled) Phase-II trials. Out of the strategies tested in early-phase clinical trials, only the most promising will make it to Phase-3 trials, wit
{"title":"\"Peritoneal failure\": A new concept to explain negative results of randomized trials evaluating intraperitoneal therapies.","authors":"Marc Pocard, Marc A Reymond","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0117","DOIUrl":"10.1515/pp-2020-0117","url":null,"abstract":"Prof. Jimmy So recently presented the results of the Extensive Peritoneal Lavage after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer (EXPEL) study at the Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium 2020 (ASCO GI) in San Francisco [1]. The EXPEL trial is a prospective randomized, high-quality surgical study evaluating the potential benefit of peritoneal lavage after surgical resection of the stomach. The trial involved 800 patients from 22 hospitals from Korea, China, Japan, Malaysia, and Singapore. Patients with cT3, T4 stomach cancer undergoing curative resection were randomized to surgery alone (control group, n = 402 patients) or surgery followed by lavage of the peritoneal cavity with 10 L of saline solution (test group, n = 398 patients). There was no difference in the 3-year cumulative incidence of recurrence between the two groups. The rate of adverse events was higher in the test group (RR= 1.58, P = 0.019). The EXPEL study is not the first study failing to show a benefit of intraperitoneal therapies. Since 2018, the community of peritoneal surgeons is collecting negative results with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in colorectal cancer, both in the prophylactic and in the therapeutic setting [2, 3]. Positive results talk louder than negative studies. They are more appealing to physicians and get broader coverage. But does that mean that peritoneal surgeons should be discouraged from pursuing a fruitless path? Or might these negative studies give them valuable insights into where to look next? Many comments have been made regarding the failure of the French PRODIGE 7 randomized controlled trial examining an additional benefit of HIPEC over cytoreductive surgery alone in patients with peritoneal metastasis of colon cancer [4–6]. The PRODIGE 7 trial showed a remarkable overall survival of around 41months in both groups, and the control group (surgery alone) performed much better than expected. Thus, the additional effect of HIPEC, if any, was too small to be detected with the sample size available. Moreover, the HIPEC effect, if any, was erased by the increased postoperative morbidity in the test group. The reasons for these repeated, unexpected failures of intraperitoneal therapies in clinical trials might differ between trials, but some lessons can be learned for all of them. The first lesson is methodological and might appear self-evident. Medical research does not start with Phase-3 trials. Peritoneal surgeons should first go back to the laboratory to explore new approaches such as advanced drug delivery systems, nanoparticles, carrier solutions, and others. Only a few of these approaches will go successfully through the preclinical development steps and will reach clinical testing in human patients. These new approaches should then be validated step by step in welldesigned Phase-I and (controlled) Phase-II trials. Out of the strategies tested in early-phase clinical trials, only the most promising will make it to Phase-3 trials, wit","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0117","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-15eCollection Date: 2020-06-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2020-0102
Koy Min Chue, Dexter Yak Seng Chan, Jimmy B Y So
Intraperitoneal chemotherapy has shown promising results for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in gastric cancer. However, the implantation of an intraperitoneal chemotherapy port may be associated with catheter-related complications. The authors describe a case of cutaneous port-site recurrence secondary to tumour seeding from an intraperitoneal chemotherapy access port.
{"title":"Cutaneous port-site recurrence secondary to tumour seeding following implantation of an intraperitoneal chemotherapy access port for gastric cancer.","authors":"Koy Min Chue, Dexter Yak Seng Chan, Jimmy B Y So","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0102","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intraperitoneal chemotherapy has shown promising results for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in gastric cancer. However, the implantation of an intraperitoneal chemotherapy port may be associated with catheter-related complications. The authors describe a case of cutaneous port-site recurrence secondary to tumour seeding from an intraperitoneal chemotherapy access port.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0102","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073072","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-15eCollection Date: 2020-06-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2020-0109
Signe Bremholm Ellebæk, Martin Graversen, Sönke Detlefsen, Lars Lundell, Claus W Fristrup, Per Pfeiffer, Michael B Mortensen
Background: Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) represents a novel approach to intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Hereby results, obtained with PIPAC in patients with advanced peritoneal metastasis (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC), are presented.
Methods: Data from CRC patients (n = 24) included in the prospective PIPAC-OPC1 and PIPAC-OPC2 trials are reported. Oxaliplatin 92 mg/m2 was administered at 4-6-week intervals. A CE certified nebulizer was used to aerosolize the chemotherapeutics. Outcome criteria were objective tumor response, survival and adverse events.
Results: Retrospective analysis of 74 PIPAC procedures carried out in 24 consecutive patients with PM from CRC included from October 2015 to February 2019. Five patients had still the primary tumor in situ, and 22 patients had received palliative systemic chemotherapy. Nineteen patients completed more than two PIPAC procedures, and objective tumor response according to the histological Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) was observed in 67% of the patients, while 21% had stable disease. Four patients (21%) had complete response (mean PRGS = 1 and negative cytology). We recorded a median survival of 37.6 (range 7.3-48.9) months from the time of PM diagnosis, whereas it was 20.5 (range 0.13-34.7) months following the first PIPAC session. Minor postoperative complications were noted, and few were considered causally related to the PIPAC treatment. However, two cases of severe postoperative complications were recorded (urosepsis and iatrogenic bowel perforation).
Conclusions: PIPAC with low-dose oxaliplatin can induce objective tumor regression in selected patients with advanced PM from colorectal cancer.
{"title":"Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)-directed treatment of peritoneal metastasis in end-stage colo-rectal cancer patients.","authors":"Signe Bremholm Ellebæk, Martin Graversen, Sönke Detlefsen, Lars Lundell, Claus W Fristrup, Per Pfeiffer, Michael B Mortensen","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0109","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) represents a novel approach to intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Hereby results, obtained with PIPAC in patients with advanced peritoneal metastasis (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC), are presented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from CRC patients (<i>n</i> = 24) included in the prospective PIPAC-OPC1 and PIPAC-OPC2 trials are reported. Oxaliplatin 92 mg/m<sup>2</sup> was administered at 4-6-week intervals. A CE certified nebulizer was used to aerosolize the chemotherapeutics. Outcome criteria were objective tumor response, survival and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Retrospective analysis of 74 PIPAC procedures carried out in 24 consecutive patients with PM from CRC included from October 2015 to February 2019. Five patients had still the primary tumor in situ, and 22 patients had received palliative systemic chemotherapy. Nineteen patients completed more than two PIPAC procedures, and objective tumor response according to the histological Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) was observed in 67% of the patients, while 21% had stable disease. Four patients (21%) had complete response (mean PRGS = 1 and negative cytology). We recorded a median survival of 37.6 (range 7.3-48.9) months from the time of PM diagnosis, whereas it was 20.5 (range 0.13-34.7) months following the first PIPAC session. Minor postoperative complications were noted, and few were considered causally related to the PIPAC treatment. However, two cases of severe postoperative complications were recorded (urosepsis and iatrogenic bowel perforation).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PIPAC with low-dose oxaliplatin can induce objective tumor regression in selected patients with advanced PM from colorectal cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0109","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Background: An effective treatment strategy for peritoneal metastasis (PM) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-PM) has yet to be established. Although cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have shown favorable outcomes in certain malignancies, their role in peritoneal metastatic HCC is unclear. Herein, we present a series of patients with HCC-PM treated with CRS/HIPEC and evaluate their outcomes.
Methods: Records of patients with HCC-PM who had undergone CRS/HIPEC at the Hyperthermia Center of Yuan's General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, between September 2015 and December 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were followed up until September 2019. We assessed the clinical courses and outcomes of these patients to clarify the benefits of CRS/HIPEC.
Results: Six patients were included in our study. HCC-PM occurred synchronously in one patient and occurred metachronously in five patients after therapeutic minimally invasive procedures, including radiofrequency ablation, laparoscopic hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy or spontaneously. The median peritoneal cancer index was 18.5. All patients experienced complete peritoneal cytoreduction without perioperative mortality. One patient had two CTCAE grade 3 complications. The median follow-up was 16 months. The median overall survival was 15.7 months. Four patients died of lung metastasis or liver failure owing to intrahepatic recurrence. The survival rates observed at 1, 2, and 4 years were 66.7%, 33.3%, and 33.3%, respectively.
Conclusions: CRS followed by HIPEC is feasible in patients with HCC-PM and might provide selected patients a chance for local disease control and longer survival. CRS/HIPEC might be considered as a treatment option in highly selected patients, as part of multimodal therapy approaches.
{"title":"Cytoreduction surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for treating advanced peritoneal metastases of hepatocellular carcinoma.","authors":"Kuo-Chen Hung, Kun-Lin Yang, Guan-Cheng Huang, Yu-Fu Chen, Wen-Teng Chang, Chia-Chang Chuang","doi":"10.1515/pp-2019-0030","DOIUrl":"10.1515/pp-2019-0030","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An effective treatment strategy for peritoneal metastasis (PM) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC-PM) has yet to be established. Although cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have shown favorable outcomes in certain malignancies, their role in peritoneal metastatic HCC is unclear. Herein, we present a series of patients with HCC-PM treated with CRS/HIPEC and evaluate their outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Records of patients with HCC-PM who had undergone CRS/HIPEC at the Hyperthermia Center of Yuan's General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, between September 2015 and December 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were followed up until September 2019. We assessed the clinical courses and outcomes of these patients to clarify the benefits of CRS/HIPEC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six patients were included in our study. HCC-PM occurred synchronously in one patient and occurred metachronously in five patients after therapeutic minimally invasive procedures, including radiofrequency ablation, laparoscopic hepatectomy, robotic hepatectomy or spontaneously. The median peritoneal cancer index was 18.5. All patients experienced complete peritoneal cytoreduction without perioperative mortality. One patient had two CTCAE grade 3 complications. The median follow-up was 16 months. The median overall survival was 15.7 months. Four patients died of lung metastasis or liver failure owing to intrahepatic recurrence. The survival rates observed at 1, 2, and 4 years were 66.7%, 33.3%, and 33.3%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CRS followed by HIPEC is feasible in patients with HCC-PM and might provide selected patients a chance for local disease control and longer survival. CRS/HIPEC might be considered as a treatment option in highly selected patients, as part of multimodal therapy approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2019-0030","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-12eCollection Date: 2020-06-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2020-0113
Lucio Zennaro, Lorenzo Nicolè, Paola Vanzani, Filippo Cappello, Ambrogio Fassina
Background: Metabolomic profiling of human malignant effusion remain a field poorly investigated. Proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H-NMR) spectroscopy is a rapid relatively low cost technique, and effusion is an optimal biospecimen suitable for metabonomic investigations. With this study we addressed metabolomic profiling of malignant ascitic effusion (mAE) from patients with high grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC), Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and benign AEs (bAEs) from patients with reactive peritonitis.
Methods: Metabolic profiling with 1H-NMR was performed on 72 AEs (31 HGSOC, 16 HCC and 25 bAE) prospectively collected in our cytology service. Histological confirmation was requested for all malignant case. Multivariate analysis comprising PCA and PLS-DA was applied to discover metabolites suitable to differentiate effusions among the investigated groups.
Results: 1H-NMR metabonomic analysis showed clearly different spectra for malignant and benign AEs, as well as for HGSOC vs. HCC effusion. When compared with HCC effusions, the HGSOC effusion were enriched, among all, in alanine, lipids, N-acetyl groups and phenylalanine and depleted in glutamine.
Conclusions: Subject to validation in further larger studies, 1H-NMR metabonomics could be an effective and reliable ancillary tool for AE investigations and diagnosis particularly in acellular effusions.
{"title":"<sup>1</sup>H-NMR spectroscopy metabonomics of reactive, ovarian carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma ascites.","authors":"Lucio Zennaro, Lorenzo Nicolè, Paola Vanzani, Filippo Cappello, Ambrogio Fassina","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0113","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metabolomic profiling of human malignant effusion remain a field poorly investigated. Proton nuclear magnetic resonance (<sup>1</sup>H-NMR) spectroscopy is a rapid relatively low cost technique, and effusion is an optimal biospecimen suitable for metabonomic investigations. With this study we addressed metabolomic profiling of malignant ascitic effusion (mAE) from patients with high grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC), Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and benign AEs (bAEs) from patients with reactive peritonitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Metabolic profiling with <sup>1</sup>H-NMR was performed on 72 AEs (31 HGSOC, 16 HCC and 25 bAE) prospectively collected in our cytology service. Histological confirmation was requested for all malignant case. Multivariate analysis comprising PCA and PLS-DA was applied to discover metabolites suitable to differentiate effusions among the investigated groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong><sup>1</sup>H-NMR metabonomic analysis showed clearly different spectra for malignant and benign AEs, as well as for HGSOC vs. HCC effusion. When compared with HCC effusions, the HGSOC effusion were enriched, among all, in alanine, lipids, N-acetyl groups and phenylalanine and depleted in glutamine.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Subject to validation in further larger studies, <sup>1</sup>H-NMR metabonomics could be an effective and reliable ancillary tool for AE investigations and diagnosis particularly in acellular effusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0113","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-17eCollection Date: 2020-06-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2019-0035
Rea Lo Dico, Jean Marc Gornet, Nicola Guglielmo, Aziz Zaanan, Julien Taieb, Marc Pocard
Background: A new treatment using bidirectional intraperitoneal (IP) and intravenous (IV) chemotherapy developed by Asiatic surgeons improves outcomes in patients with synchronous peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC).
Methods: We enrolled six consecutive patients with unresectable PM from GC who underwent bidirectional chemotherapy using IP docetaxel and IV FOLFOX or LV5FU2. In one course, IP docetaxel 30 mg/m2 was administrated on days 1, 8 and 15, and IV FOLFOX or LV5FU2 was administered on days 1 and 15, followed by 7 days of rest. Before and after a complete bidirectional cycle of three courses, the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was evaluated by laparoscopy. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of bidirectional chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), and the success of the therapeutic strategy was reflected by a decrease of 25% of the initial PCI.
Results: All patients completed one bidirectional cycle. The regimen was well tolerated. The median OS was 13 months [range 5-18], and the 1-year OS rate was 67%. After the first bidirectional cycle, the PCI decrease ≥25% of the initial value in four patients. A major histological response was observed in four patients.
Conclusions: This is the first Western study and confirms the feasibility and safety of bidirectional treatment using IP and IV chemotherapy for patients with unresectable PM from GC, resulting in a 13-month median OS with limited morbidity. The decrease in PCI after one bidirectional cycle is promising.
{"title":"Bidirectional chemotherapy combining intraperitoneal docetaxel with intravenous 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin for patients with unresectable peritoneal metastasis from gastric cancer: the first study in Western countries.","authors":"Rea Lo Dico, Jean Marc Gornet, Nicola Guglielmo, Aziz Zaanan, Julien Taieb, Marc Pocard","doi":"10.1515/pp-2019-0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2019-0035","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A new treatment using bidirectional intraperitoneal (IP) and intravenous (IV) chemotherapy developed by Asiatic surgeons improves outcomes in patients with synchronous peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled six consecutive patients with unresectable PM from GC who underwent bidirectional chemotherapy using IP docetaxel and IV FOLFOX or LV5FU2. In one course, IP docetaxel 30 mg/m<sup>2</sup> was administrated on days 1, 8 and 15, and IV FOLFOX or LV5FU2 was administered on days 1 and 15, followed by 7 days of rest. Before and after a complete bidirectional cycle of three courses, the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was evaluated by laparoscopy. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of bidirectional chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), and the success of the therapeutic strategy was reflected by a decrease of 25% of the initial PCI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients completed one bidirectional cycle. The regimen was well tolerated. The median OS was 13 months [range 5-18], and the 1-year OS rate was 67%. After the first bidirectional cycle, the PCI decrease ≥25% of the initial value in four patients. A major histological response was observed in four patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the first Western study and confirms the feasibility and safety of bidirectional treatment using IP and IV chemotherapy for patients with unresectable PM from GC, resulting in a 13-month median OS with limited morbidity. The decrease in PCI after one bidirectional cycle is promising.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2019-0035","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38073071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Scalloping of visceral organs like liver and spleen can cause certain peritoneal diseases. It has usually been described with pseudomyxoma peritonei and peritoneal carcinomatosis. Occasionally, it has also been described with certain benign conditions like peritoneal tuberculosis. We describe visceral scalloping in setting of pancreatic diseases. We believe that pancreatic fluid collections exert significant pressure on the visceral organs to result in scalloping of the visceral surfaces.
{"title":"Visceral scalloping in pancreatic ascites: An uncommon manifestation of pancreatitis.","authors":"Antriksh Kumar, Atul Rana, Anupam K Singh, Pankaj Gupta, Harjeet Singh, Vishal Sharma","doi":"10.1515/pp-2020-0101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0101","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scalloping of visceral organs like liver and spleen can cause certain peritoneal diseases. It has usually been described with pseudomyxoma peritonei and peritoneal carcinomatosis. Occasionally, it has also been described with certain benign conditions like peritoneal tuberculosis. We describe visceral scalloping in setting of pancreatic diseases. We believe that pancreatic fluid collections exert significant pressure on the visceral organs to result in scalloping of the visceral surfaces.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2020-0101","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38384250","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-26eCollection Date: 2020-03-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2019-0029
Christos Iavazzo, Alexandros Fotiou, M Tsiatas, Athina Christopoulou, John Spiliotis, Paul Sugarbaker
Background: The aim of this survey was to acquire an overview of the current management of ovarian cancer with an emphasis on the utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).Methods: An email was sent to Oncologists prior to PSOGI International Symposium on Advanced Ovarian Cancer, Athens 11-13 April 2019. Doctors submitted responses on the relevant website. The self-report survey contained 17 questions.
Results: In total, 467 Medical Oncologists, Surgical Oncologists or Gynaecologic Oncologists were participated and answered to this survey. The resectability of disease was evaluated by laparoscopy from 48.5% of the participants, while 51.5% answered that they stage their patients pre-surgically with the use of CT or MRI. The preferred first intervention in advanced ovarian cancer patients is the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery (72%). Regarding the use of HIPEC, almost half of the participants answered that there is role of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer patients undergoing interval debulking surgery, while almost 70% answered positively about the utility of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer recurrence. As for the role of lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer patients, half of the responders answered negatively. Finally, only 25% of the participants responded that they always check the BRCA status of their ovarian cancer patients, despite the possible differentiation of treatment based on the molecular profiling (80%).
Conclusions: The results of this survey indicate the utility of HIPEC in treatment of ovarian cancer patients and the differences in the overall management of ovarian cancer patients in the current clinical practice.
{"title":"Survey on the current gynaecological approach of ovarian cancer patients: The utility of HIPEC.","authors":"Christos Iavazzo, Alexandros Fotiou, M Tsiatas, Athina Christopoulou, John Spiliotis, Paul Sugarbaker","doi":"10.1515/pp-2019-0029","DOIUrl":"10.1515/pp-2019-0029","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this survey was to acquire an overview of the current management of ovarian cancer with an emphasis on the utility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).<b>Methods:</b> An email was sent to Oncologists prior to PSOGI International Symposium on Advanced Ovarian Cancer, Athens 11-13 April 2019. Doctors submitted responses on the relevant website. The self-report survey contained 17 questions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 467 Medical Oncologists, Surgical Oncologists or Gynaecologic Oncologists were participated and answered to this survey. The resectability of disease was evaluated by laparoscopy from 48.5% of the participants, while 51.5% answered that they stage their patients pre-surgically with the use of CT or MRI. The preferred first intervention in advanced ovarian cancer patients is the neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreductive surgery (72%). Regarding the use of HIPEC, almost half of the participants answered that there is role of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer patients undergoing interval debulking surgery, while almost 70% answered positively about the utility of HIPEC use in ovarian cancer recurrence. As for the role of lymphadenectomy in advanced ovarian cancer patients, half of the responders answered negatively. Finally, only 25% of the participants responded that they always check the <i>BRCA</i> status of their ovarian cancer patients, despite the possible differentiation of treatment based on the molecular profiling (80%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of this survey indicate the utility of HIPEC in treatment of ovarian cancer patients and the differences in the overall management of ovarian cancer patients in the current clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2019-0029","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38294855","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-26eCollection Date: 2020-03-01DOI: 10.1515/pp-2019-0031
Philipp Schredl, Jan Philipp Ramspott, Daniel Neureiter, Klaus Emmanuel, Tarkan Jäger
Background: The body surface area (BSA) is taken as a measure for the effective contact area for dosing in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Currently, the pharmacokinetic effect of the reduced peritoneal surface area (PSA) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) during HIPEC remains unclear. Here a proprietary software solution (PEritoneal SUrface CAlculator (PESUCA)) to quantify the resected PSA in patients with peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) undergoing CRS and HIPEC is presented.
Methods: The PESUCA tool was programmed as a desktop and online software solution. The applicability was evaluated in 36 patients. The programming-algorithm is briefly summarized as follows: (1) calculation of BSA, (2) correlation to PSA, (3) calculation of the relative proportion of 40 different anatomical regions to total PSA before CRS, (4) instantaneous input of each resected proportion in the 40 anatomical regions during CRS, and (5) determination of the resected and remaining PSA after CRS.
Results: The proof of concept revealed a mean PSA of all patients before CRS of 18,741 ± 321 cm2 compared to 13,611 ± 485 cm2 after CRS (p<0.0001). Patients' supramesocolic and inframesocolic visceral and parietal peritoneal area before and after CRS procedure were quantitatively determined.
Conclusions: Here the first tool that enables detailed PSA quantification in patients with PSM undergoing CRS is presented. This makes the software a valuable contribution to ensue more accurate assessment and improved comparability of peritoneal disease extent. Furthermore, after external validation, PESUCA could be the basis for dose adjustment of intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimens based on the remaining PSA after CRS.
{"title":"The PEritoneal SUrface CAlculator (PESUCA): A new tool to quantify the resected peritoneal surface area after cytoreductive surgery.","authors":"Philipp Schredl, Jan Philipp Ramspott, Daniel Neureiter, Klaus Emmanuel, Tarkan Jäger","doi":"10.1515/pp-2019-0031","DOIUrl":"10.1515/pp-2019-0031","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The body surface area (BSA) is taken as a measure for the effective contact area for dosing in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Currently, the pharmacokinetic effect of the reduced peritoneal surface area (PSA) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) during HIPEC remains unclear. Here a proprietary software solution (PEritoneal SUrface CAlculator (PESUCA)) to quantify the resected PSA in patients with peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) undergoing CRS and HIPEC is presented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PESUCA tool was programmed as a desktop and online software solution. The applicability was evaluated in 36 patients. The programming-algorithm is briefly summarized as follows: (1) calculation of BSA, (2) correlation to PSA, (3) calculation of the relative proportion of 40 different anatomical regions to total PSA before CRS, (4) instantaneous input of each resected proportion in the 40 anatomical regions during CRS, and (5) determination of the resected and remaining PSA after CRS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proof of concept revealed a mean PSA of all patients before CRS of 18,741 ± 321 cm<sup>2</sup> compared to 13,611 ± 485 cm<sup>2</sup> after CRS (p<0.0001). Patients' supramesocolic and inframesocolic visceral and parietal peritoneal area before and after CRS procedure were quantitatively determined.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Here the first tool that enables detailed PSA quantification in patients with PSM undergoing CRS is presented. This makes the software a valuable contribution to ensue more accurate assessment and improved comparability of peritoneal disease extent. Furthermore, after external validation, PESUCA could be the basis for dose adjustment of intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimens based on the remaining PSA after CRS.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2020-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/pp-2019-0031","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38343862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}