加压腹腔内气雾化疗(PIPAC)治疗方案共识声明

IF 1.4 Q4 ONCOLOGY Pleura and Peritoneum Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1515/pp-2022-0102
O. Sgarbura, C. Eveno, M. Alyami, Naoual Bakrin, D. C. Guiral, W. Ceelen, X. Delgadillo, T. Dellinger, A. di Giorgio, A. Kefleyesus, V. Khomiakov, M. Mortensen, J. Murphy, M. Pocard, M. Reymond, M. Robella, K. Rovers, J. So, S. P. Somashekhar, C. Tempfer, K. van der Speeten, L. Villeneuve, W. Yong, M. Hübner
{"title":"加压腹腔内气雾化疗(PIPAC)治疗方案共识声明","authors":"O. Sgarbura, C. Eveno, M. Alyami, Naoual Bakrin, D. C. Guiral, W. Ceelen, X. Delgadillo, T. Dellinger, A. di Giorgio, A. Kefleyesus, V. Khomiakov, M. Mortensen, J. Murphy, M. Pocard, M. Reymond, M. Robella, K. Rovers, J. So, S. P. Somashekhar, C. Tempfer, K. van der Speeten, L. Villeneuve, W. Yong, M. Hübner","doi":"10.1515/pp-2022-0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objectives Safe implementation and thorough evaluation of new treatments require prospective data monitoring and standardization of treatments. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a promising alternative for the treatment of patients with peritoneal disease with an increasing number of suggested drug regimens. The aim was to reach expert consensus on current PIPAC treatment protocols and to define the most important research topics. Methods The expert panel included the most active PIPAC centers, organizers of PIPAC courses and principal investigators of prospective studies on PIPAC. A comprehensive literature review served as base for a two-day hybrid consensus meeting which was accompanied by a modified three-round Delphi process. Consensus bar was set at 70% for combined (strong and weak) positive or negative votes according to GRADE. Research questions were prioritized from 0 to 10 (highest importance). Results Twenty-two out of 26 invited experts completed the entire consensus process. Consensus was reached for 10/10 final questions. The combination of doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2) and cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2) was endorsed by 20/22 experts (90.9%). 16/22 (72.7%) supported oxaliplatin at 120 with potential reduction to 90 mg/m2 (frail patients), and 77.2% suggested PIPAC-Ox in combination with 5-FU. Mitomycin-C and Nab-paclitaxel were favoured as alternative regimens. The most important research questions concerned PIPAC conditions (n=3), standard (n=4) and alternative regimens (n=5) and efficacy of PIPAC treatment (n=2); 8/14 were given a priority of ≥8/10. Conclusions The current consensus should help to limit heterogeneity of treatment protocols but underlines the utmost importance of further research.","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":"43 1","pages":"1 - 7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consensus statement for treatment protocols in pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)\",\"authors\":\"O. Sgarbura, C. Eveno, M. Alyami, Naoual Bakrin, D. C. Guiral, W. Ceelen, X. Delgadillo, T. Dellinger, A. di Giorgio, A. Kefleyesus, V. Khomiakov, M. Mortensen, J. Murphy, M. Pocard, M. Reymond, M. Robella, K. Rovers, J. So, S. P. Somashekhar, C. Tempfer, K. van der Speeten, L. Villeneuve, W. Yong, M. Hübner\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/pp-2022-0102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objectives Safe implementation and thorough evaluation of new treatments require prospective data monitoring and standardization of treatments. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a promising alternative for the treatment of patients with peritoneal disease with an increasing number of suggested drug regimens. The aim was to reach expert consensus on current PIPAC treatment protocols and to define the most important research topics. Methods The expert panel included the most active PIPAC centers, organizers of PIPAC courses and principal investigators of prospective studies on PIPAC. A comprehensive literature review served as base for a two-day hybrid consensus meeting which was accompanied by a modified three-round Delphi process. Consensus bar was set at 70% for combined (strong and weak) positive or negative votes according to GRADE. Research questions were prioritized from 0 to 10 (highest importance). Results Twenty-two out of 26 invited experts completed the entire consensus process. Consensus was reached for 10/10 final questions. The combination of doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2) and cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2) was endorsed by 20/22 experts (90.9%). 16/22 (72.7%) supported oxaliplatin at 120 with potential reduction to 90 mg/m2 (frail patients), and 77.2% suggested PIPAC-Ox in combination with 5-FU. Mitomycin-C and Nab-paclitaxel were favoured as alternative regimens. The most important research questions concerned PIPAC conditions (n=3), standard (n=4) and alternative regimens (n=5) and efficacy of PIPAC treatment (n=2); 8/14 were given a priority of ≥8/10. Conclusions The current consensus should help to limit heterogeneity of treatment protocols but underlines the utmost importance of further research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pleura and Peritoneum\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pleura and Peritoneum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2022-0102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pleura and Peritoneum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2022-0102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

目的新疗法的安全实施和全面评估需要前瞻性数据监测和治疗标准化。加压腹膜内气溶胶化疗(PIPAC)是治疗腹膜疾病患者的一种很有前途的替代方案,建议的药物方案越来越多。目的是就目前的PIPAC治疗方案达成专家共识,并确定最重要的研究课题。方法专家小组包括最活跃的PIPAC中心、PIPAC课程组织者和PIPAC前瞻性研究的主要研究者。全面的文献综述作为基础,为期两天的混合共识会议,伴随着修改的三轮德尔菲过程。根据GRADE,赞成票或反对票的一致门槛设定为70%。研究问题的优先级从0到10(最高重要性)。结果26位受邀专家中有22位完成了整个共识过程。最后10个问题达成了共识。阿霉素(2.1 mg/m2)与顺铂(10.5 mg/m2)联合用药获得20/22位专家(90.9%)的认可。16/22(72.7%)的人支持奥沙利铂120,有可能降至90mg /m2(体弱患者),77.2%的人建议PIPAC-Ox联合5-FU。丝裂霉素- c和nab -紫杉醇是首选的替代方案。最重要的研究问题涉及PIPAC条件(n=3)、标准(n=4)和替代方案(n=5)以及PIPAC治疗的疗效(n=2);8/14被赋予≥8/10的优先级。目前的共识应该有助于限制治疗方案的异质性,但强调了进一步研究的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Consensus statement for treatment protocols in pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)
Abstract Objectives Safe implementation and thorough evaluation of new treatments require prospective data monitoring and standardization of treatments. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a promising alternative for the treatment of patients with peritoneal disease with an increasing number of suggested drug regimens. The aim was to reach expert consensus on current PIPAC treatment protocols and to define the most important research topics. Methods The expert panel included the most active PIPAC centers, organizers of PIPAC courses and principal investigators of prospective studies on PIPAC. A comprehensive literature review served as base for a two-day hybrid consensus meeting which was accompanied by a modified three-round Delphi process. Consensus bar was set at 70% for combined (strong and weak) positive or negative votes according to GRADE. Research questions were prioritized from 0 to 10 (highest importance). Results Twenty-two out of 26 invited experts completed the entire consensus process. Consensus was reached for 10/10 final questions. The combination of doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2) and cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2) was endorsed by 20/22 experts (90.9%). 16/22 (72.7%) supported oxaliplatin at 120 with potential reduction to 90 mg/m2 (frail patients), and 77.2% suggested PIPAC-Ox in combination with 5-FU. Mitomycin-C and Nab-paclitaxel were favoured as alternative regimens. The most important research questions concerned PIPAC conditions (n=3), standard (n=4) and alternative regimens (n=5) and efficacy of PIPAC treatment (n=2); 8/14 were given a priority of ≥8/10. Conclusions The current consensus should help to limit heterogeneity of treatment protocols but underlines the utmost importance of further research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Combined Nabpaclitaxel pressurized intraPeritoneal aerosol chemotherapy with systemic Nabpaclitaxel-Gemcitabine chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer peritoneal metastases: protocol of single-arm, open-label, phase II trial (Nab-PIPAC trial). Thromboelastogram changes are associated with postoperative complications after cytoreductive surgery. Impact of laparoscopic ultrasound during PIPAC directed treatment of unresectable peritoneal metastasis. In vitro 3D microfluidic peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer model for testing different oxaliplatin-based HIPEC regimens. Ascites does not accompany pleural effusion developing under dasatinib therapy in patients with CML-CP.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1