27 research outputs found
Morbidly Obese Patients Exhibit Increased CYP2E1-Mediated Oxidation of Acetaminophen
Introduction: Acetaminophen (paracetamol) is mainly metabolized via glucuronidation and sulphation, while the minor pathway through cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2E1 is held responsible for hepatotoxicity. In obese patients, CYP2E1 activity is reported to be induced, thereby potentially worsening the safety profile of acetaminophen. The aim of this study was to determine the pharmacokinetics of acetaminophen and its metabolites (glucuronide, sulphate, cysteine and mercapturate) in morbidly obese and non-obese patients. Methods: Twenty morbidly obese patients (with a median total body weight [TBW] of 140.1 kg [range 106–193.1 kg] and body mass index [BMI] of 45.1 kg/m2 [40–55.2 kg/m2]) and eight non-obese patients (with a TBW of 69.4 kg [53.4–91.7] and BMI of 21.8 kg/m2 [19.4–27.4]) received 2 g of intravenous acetaminophen. Fifteen blood samples were collected per patient. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was performed using NONMEM. Results: In morbidly obese patients, the median area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to 8 h (AUC0–8h) of acetaminophen was significantly smaller (P = 0.009), while the AUC0–8h ratios of the glucuronide, sulphate and cysteine metabolites to acetaminophen were significantly higher (P = 0.043, 0.004 and 0.010, respectively). In the model, acetaminophen CYP2E1-mediated clearance (cysteine and mercapturate) increased with lean body weight [LBW] (population mean [relative standard error] 0.0185 L/min [15 %], P < 0.01). Moreover, accelerated formation of the cysteine and mercapturate metabolites was found with increasing LBW (P < 0.001). Glucuronidation clearance (0.219 L/min [5 %]) and sulphation clearance (0.0646 L/min [6 %]) also increased with LBW (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Obesity leads to lower acetaminophen concentrations and earlier and higher peak concentrations of acetaminophen cysteine and mercapturate. While a higher dose may be anticipated to achieve adequate acetaminophen concentrations, the increased CYP2E1-mediated pathway may preclude this dose adjustment
Second and third look laparoscopy in pT4 colon cancer patients for early detection of peritoneal metastases; the COLOPEC 2 randomized multicentre trial
Background: Approximately 20–30% of patients with pT4 colon cancer develop metachronous peritoneal metastases
(PM). Due to restricted accuracy of imaging modalities and absence of early symptoms, PM are often detected at a stage
in which only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative intent treatment. Preliminary findings of the COLOPEC trial
(NCT02231086) revealed that PM were already detected during surgical re-exploration within tw
Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial
Background: The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. Methods/Design: The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 °C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. Discussion: Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival. Trial registration number: NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov)
Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Background: Observational cohort studies have suggested that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with better short-term outcomes compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), such as less intraoperative blood loss, lower morbidity, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced total costs. Confounding by indication has probably influenced these findings, given that case-matched studies failed to confirm the superiority of MIDP. This accentuates the need for multicenter randomized controlled trials, which are currently lacking. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIDP compared with ODP even in an enhanced recovery setting. Methods: LEOPARD is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, superiority trial in all 17 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. A total of 102 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant or malignant disease will be randomly allocated to undergo MIDP or ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. The primary outcome is time (days) to functional recovery, defined as all of the following: independently mobile at the preoperative level, sufficient pain control with oral medication alone, ability to maintain sufficient (i.e. >50%) daily required caloric intake, no intravenous fluid administration and no signs of infection. Secondary outcomes are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life and costs. Discussion: The LEOPARD trial is designed to investigate whether MIDP reduces the time to functional recovery compared with ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register, NTR5188. Registered on 9 April 201
Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial
Background: The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. These clinical problems underline the need for effective adjuvant therapy in high-risk patients to minimize the risk of outgrowth of peritoneal micro metastases. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to be suitable for this purpose. Without the need for cytoreductive surgery, adjuvant HIPEC can be performed with a low complication rate and short hospital stay. Methods/Design: The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 degrees C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. Discussion: Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival
Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus palliative systemic chemotherapy in stomach cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination, the study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (PERISCOPE II)
Background: At present, palliative systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment in the Netherlands for gastric
cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination. In contrast to lymphatic and haematogenous dissemination,
peritoneal dissemination may be regarded as locoregional spread of disease. Administering cytotoxic drugs directly
into the peritoneal cavity has an advantage over systemic chemotherapy since high concentrations can be
delivered directly into the peritoneal cavity with limited systemic toxicity. The combination of a radical gastrectomy
with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising
results in patients with gastric cancer in Asia. However, the results obtained in Asian patients cannot be
extrapolated to Western patients.
The aim of this study is to compare the overall survival between patients with gastric cancer with limited peritoneal
dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy, and those
treated with gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Methods: In this multicentre randomised controlled two-armed phase III trial, 106 patients will be randomised (1:1)
between palliative systemic chemotherapy only (standard treatment) and gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC
(experimental treatment) after 3–4 cycles of systemic chemotherapy.Patients with gastric cancer are eligible for
inclusion if (1) the primary cT3-cT4 gastric tumour including regional lymph nodes is considered to be resectable,
(2) limited peritoneal dissemination (Peritoneal Cancer Index < 7) and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology are
confirmed by laparoscopy or laparotomy, and (3) systemic chemotherapy was given (prior to inclusion) without
disease progression.
Discussion: The PERISCOPE II study will determine whether gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal
dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with systemic chemotherapy, gastrectomy, CRS
and HIPEC have a survival benefit over patients treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy only.
Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03348150; registration date November 2017; first enrolment November 2017;
expected end date December 2022; trial status: Ongoing
Preoperative biliary drainage for periampullary tumors causing obstructive jaundice; DRainage vs. (direct) OPeration (DROP-trial)
BACKGROUND: Surgery in patients with obstructive jaundice caused by a periampullary (pancreas, papilla, distal bile duct) tumor is associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications than in non-jaundiced patients. Preoperative biliary drainage was introduced in an attempt to improve the general condition and thus reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality. Early studies showed a reduction in morbidity. However, more recently the focus has shifted towards the negative effects of drainage, such as an increase of infectious complications. Whether biliary drainage should always be performed in jaundiced patients remains controversial. The randomized controlled multicenter DROP-trial (DRainage vs. Operation) was conceived to compare the outcome of a 'preoperative biliary drainage strategy' (standard strategy) with that of an 'early-surgery' strategy, with respect to the incidence of severe complications (primary-outcome measure), hospital stay, number of invasive diagnostic tests, costs, and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with obstructive jaundice due to a periampullary tumor, eligible for exploration after staging with CT scan, and scheduled to undergo a "curative" resection, will be randomized to either "early surgical treatment" (within one week) or "preoperative biliary drainage" (for 4 weeks) and subsequent surgical treatment (standard treatment). Primary outcome measure is the percentage of severe complications up to 90 days after surgery. The sample size calculation is based on the equivalence design for the primary outcome measure. If equivalence is found, the comparison of the secondary outcomes will be essential in selecting the preferred strategy. Based on a 40% complication rate for early surgical treatment and 48% for preoperative drainage, equivalence is taken to be demonstrated if the percentage of severe complications with early surgical treatment is not more than 10% higher compared to standard treatment: preoperative biliary drainage. Accounting for a 10% dropout, 105 patients are needed in each arm resulting in a study population of 210 (alpha = 0.95, beta = 0.8). DISCUSSION: The DROP-trial is a randomized controlled multicenter trial that will provide evidence whether or not preoperative biliary drainage is to be performed in patients with obstructive jaundice due to a periampullary tumor
Costs and quality of life in a randomized trial comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD trial)
Postponed or immediate drainage of infected necrotizing pancreatitis (POINTER trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Background
Infected necrosis complicates 10% of all acute pancreatitis episodes and is associated with 15–20% mortality. The current standard treatment for infected necrotizing pancreatitis is the step-up approach (catheter drainage, followed, if necessary, by minimally invasive necrosectomy). Catheter drainage is preferably postponed until the stage of walled-off necrosis, which usually takes 4 weeks. This delay stems from the time when open necrosectomy was the standard. It is unclear whether such delay is needed for catheter drainage or whether earlier intervention could actually be beneficial in the current step-up approach. The POINTER trial investigates if immediate catheter drainage in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis is superior to the current practice of postponed intervention.
Methods
POINTER is a randomized controlled multicenter superiority trial. All patients with necrotizing pancreatitis are screened for eligibility. In total, 104 adult patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis will be randomized to immediate (within 24 h) catheter drainage or current standard care involving postponed catheter drainage. Necrosectomy, if necessary, is preferably postponed until the stage of walled-off necrosis, in both treatment arms. The primary outcome is the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI), which covers all complications between randomization and 6-month follow up. Secondary outcomes include mortality, complications, number of (repeat) interventions, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) lengths of stay, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct and indirect costs. Standard follow-up is at 3 and 6 months after randomization.
Discussion
The POINTER trial investigates if immediate catheter drainage in infected necrotizing pancreatitis reduces the composite endpoint of complications, as compared with the current standard treatment strategy involving delay of intervention until the stage of walled-off necrosis
Postoperative interleukin-6 level and early detection of complications after elective major abdominal surgery
Objective: To assess the association of systemic inflammation and outcome after major abdominal surgery. Background: Major abdominal surgery carries a high postoperative morbidity and mortality rate. Studies suggest that inflammation is associated with unfavorable outcome. Methods: Levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-a and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were assessed in 137 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Blood samples were drawn on days 0, 1, 3, and 7, and SIRS was scored during 48 hours after surgery. Primary outcome was a composite of mortality, pneumonia, sepsis, anastomotic dehiscence, wound infection, noncardiac respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, and reoperation within 30 days of surgery. Results: An IL-6 level more than 432 pg/mL on day 1 was associated with an increased risk of complications (adjusted odds ratio: 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-8.5) and a longer median length of hospital stay (7 vs 12 days, P <0.001). As a single test, an IL-6 cut-off level of 432 pg/mL on day 1 yielded a specificity of 70% and a sensitivity of 64% for the prediction of complications (area under the curve: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.56-0.77). Levels of CRP started to discriminate from day 3 onward with a specificity of 87% and a sensitivity of 58% for a cut-off level of 203 mg/L (AUC: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.63-0.83). Conclusions: A high IL-6 level on day 1 is associated with postoperative complications. Levels of IL-6 help distinguish between patients at low and high risk for complications before changes in levels of CRP