Patient-reported outcomes during repetitive oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases in a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial (CRC-PIPAC)

BACKGROUND: CRC-PIPAC prospectively assessed repetitive oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) as a palliative monotherapy (i.e., without concomitant systemic therapy in between subsequent procedures) for unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The present study explored patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during trial treatment. METHODS: In this single-arm phase 2 trial in two tertiary centers, patients with isolated unresectable CPM received 6-weekly PIPAC-OX (92 mg/m(2)). PROs (calculated from EQ-5D-5L, and EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29) were compared between baseline and 1 and 4 weeks after the first three procedures using linear mixed modeling with determination of clinical relevance (Cohen’s D ≥ 0.50) of statistically significant differences. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent 59 procedures (median 3 [range 1–6]). Several PROs solely worsened 1 week after the first procedure (index value − 0.10, p < 0.001; physical functioning − 20, p < 0.001; role functioning − 27, p < 0.001; social functioning − 18, p < 0.001; C30 summary score − 16, p < 0.001; appetite loss + 15, p = 0.007; diarrhea + 15, p = 0.002; urinary frequency + 13, p = 0.004; flatulence + 13, p = 0.001). These PROs returned to baseline at subsequent time points. Other PROs worsened 1 week after the first procedure (fatigue + 23, p < 0.001; pain + 29, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 32, p < 0.001), second procedure (fatigue + 20, p < 0.001; pain + 21, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 20, p = 0.002), and third procedure (pain + 22, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 22, p = 0.002). Except for appetite loss, all changes were clinically relevant. All analyzed PROs returned to baseline 4 weeks after the third procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving repetitive PIPAC-OX monotherapy for unresectable CPM had clinically relevant but reversible worsening of several PROs, mainly 1 week after the first procedure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03246321; Netherlands trial register: NL6426. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08802-6

The impact of body weight on the development of peritoneal metastases in colorectal cancer patients: results from a nationwide cohort study

Abstract Background Obesity is a major global health problem and an important risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC) is increased body weight. Obesity plays a role in the peritoneal dissemination of cancer; however, it is unclear whether this also applies for peritoneal dissemination of CRC. The purpose of this study was to provide insight in the role of obesity on the peritoneal dissemination of colorectal cancer. Methods Of all patients diagnosed with CRC in the Netherlands in the first half of 2015, follow-up data was completed in 2019. Weight at time of primary diagnosis was categorized as underweight, normal weight, overweight, or obese. Logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between weight and the presence of synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM), and Cox regression modelling was used to assess the association between weight and metachronous CPM. Patient and tumor characteristics were taken into account. The analyses were adjusted for tumor stage, nodal stage, tumor location, and tumor histology. Results In total, 6436 patients were included in this study. Two-hundred ninety-three (4.6%) patients presented with synchronous CPM at the time of primary diagnosis, while another 278 (5.1%) patients developed metachronous CPM after a median time of 16.5 months. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression modelling did not identify an effect of weight on the presence of synchronous CPM. Neither underweight (odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% CI 0.48–2.54), nor overweight (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.71–1.29), or obesity (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56–1.26) was either positively or negatively associated with the presence of synchronous peritoneal metastases as compared to normal weight. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression modelling did not identify an effect of weight on the development of metachronous CPM. Neither underweight (HR 0.162, 95% CI 0.02–1.16), nor overweight (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.82–1.39), or obesity (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.73–1.16) was either positively or negatively associated with the presence of synchronous peritoneal metastases as compared to normal weight. Conclusion CRC patients who are overweight or obese are not more at risk for the presence of synchronous CPM nor development of metachronous CPM than their normal-weight counterparts

Synchronous peritoneal metastases from lung cancer:incidence, associated factors, treatment and survival: a Dutch population-based study

Peritoneal metastases (PM) from lung cancer are rare and it is unknown how they affect the prognosis of patients with lung cancer. This population-based study aimed to assess the incidence, associated factors, treatment and prognosis of PM from lung cancer. Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used. All patients diagnosed with lung cancer between 2008 and 2018 were included. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the presence of PM. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the overall survival (OS) of patients with PM. Between 2008 and 2018, 129,651 patients were diagnosed with lung cancer, of whom 2533 (2.0%) patients were diagnosed with PM. The European Standardized Rate of PM increased significantly from 0.6 in 2008 to 1.4 in 2018 (p < 0.001). Age between 50 and 74 years, T3–4 tumour stage, N2–3 nodal stage, tumour morphology of a small cell lung cancer or adenocarcinoma, and the presence of systemic metastases were associated with the presence of PM. The median OS of patients with PM was 2.5 months. Older age, male sex, T3–4 tumour stage, N2–3 nodal stage, not receiving systemic treatment, and the presence of systemic metastases were associated with a worse OS. Synchronous PM were diagnosed in 2.0% of patients with lung cancer and resulted in a very poor survival

The Impact of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) versus Conventional Surgery on Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Comparative Cohort Study between the CAIRO6 Trial and the PROCORE Study

Purpose&mdash;To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases to PROs of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing conventional surgery. Methods&mdash;Data were extracted from the CAIRO6 trial (CRS-HIPEC group) and the PROCORE study (conventional surgery group). Nine predefined PROs (derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire) were compared at baseline, in the early postoperative period and one year postoperatively, with correction for treatment with systemic therapy using linear mixed modeling. Results&mdash;In total, 331 patients were included: 71 in the CRS-HIPEC group and 260 in the conventional surgery group. All predefined PROs (fatigue, diarrhea, C30 summary score, Global Health Status, physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning) did not differ significantly between the groups at all three timepoints, and differential effects over time for all PROs did not differ significantly between the groups. Significant worsening of fatigue, C30 summary score, physical and role functioning (both groups), and cognitive and social functioning (conventional surgery group only) was present in the early postoperative period. All scores returned to baseline at one year postoperatively, except for physical and cognitive functioning in the conventional surgery group. Emotional functioning improved postoperatively in both groups compared to baseline. Conclusion&mdash;Despite a more extensive procedure with greater risk of morbidity, CRS-HIPEC in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases did not have a greater negative impact on PROs than conventional surgery in patients with CRC. Further, systemic therapy did not affect these PROs. These findings may facilitate future patient counseling and shared decision making in clinical practice

Systemic Pharmacokinetics of Oxaliplatin After Intraperitoneal Administration by Electrostatic Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) in Patients with Unresectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases in the CRC-PIPAC Trial

Background Electrostatic pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) is a palliative treatment for unresectable peritoneal metastases from various primary cancers. However, little is known about the systemic pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin after ePIPAC. Methods Twenty patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases were treated with repetitive ePIPAC monotherapy with oxaliplatin (92 mg/m(2)) and a simultaneous intravenous bolus of leucovorin (20 mg/m(2)) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2)). Samples were collected during each ePIPAC: whole blood att = 0,t = 5,t = 10,t = 20,t = 30,t = 60,t = 120,t = 240,t = 360 andt = 1080 min for plasma and plasma ultrafiltrate concentrations; urine att = 0,t = 1,t = 3,t = 5 andt = 7 days. Samples were analyzed using atomic absorption spectrometry. Pharmacokinetics were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Results Four patients received one ePIPAC, three patients received two ePIPAC, and thirteen patients received >= 3 ePIPAC. The population pharmacokinetic models adequately described the pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin after ePIPAC. The plasma ultrafiltrateC(max)of oxaliplatin reached 1.36-1.90 mu g/mL after 30 min with an AUC(0-24 h)of 9.6-11.7 mu g/mL * h. The plasmaC(max)reached 2.67-3.28 mu g/mL after 90 min with an AUC(0-24 h)of 49.0-59.5 mu g/mL * h. The absorption rate constant (Ka) was 1.13/h. Urine concentrations of oxaliplatin rapidly decreased to less than 3.60 mu g/mL in 90% of the samples at day 7. Discussion Systemic exposure to oxaliplatin after ePIPAC seemed comparable to that after systemic chemotherapy, as described in other literature. Since this is an indirect comparison, future research should focus on the direct comparison between the systemic exposure to oxaliplatin after ePIPAC and after systemic chemotherapy

Comparing patient reported abdominal pain between patients treated with oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) and primary colorectal cancer surgery

Oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) is an emerging palliative treatment for patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases. Previously, our study group reported that patients experienced abdominal pain for several weeks after PIPAC-OX. However, it is unknown how this compares to abdominal pain after regular colorectal cancer surgery. To provide some perspective, this study compared the presence of abdominal pain after PIPAC-OX to the presence of abdominal pain after primary tumor surgery. Patient reported abdominal pain scores (EORTC QLQ-CR-29), from two prospective, Dutch cohorts were used in this study. Scores ranged from 0 to 100, a higher score represents more abdominal pain. Abdominal pain at baseline and at four weeks after treatment were compared between the two groups. Twenty patients who underwent PIPAC-OX and 322 patients who underwent primary tumor surgery were included in the analysis. At baseline, there were no differences in abdominal pain between both groups (mean 20 vs. 18, respectively; p?=?0.688). Four weeks after treatment, abdominal pain was significantly worse in the PIPAC group (39 vs 15, respectively; p?&lt;?0.001; Cohen's d?=?0.99). The differential effect over time for abdominal pain differed significantly between both groups (mean difference: 19 vs -?3, respectively; p?=?0.004; Cohen's d?=?0.88). PIPAC-OX resulted in significantly worse postoperative abdominal pain than primary tumor surgery. These results can be used for patient counseling and stress the need for adequate analgesia during and after PIPAC-OX. Further research is required to prevent or reduce abdominal pain after PIPAC-OX.Trial registration CRC-PIPAC: Clinicaltrails.gov NCT03246321 (01-10-2017)

Detection of tumor-derived cell-free DNA from colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases in plasma and peritoneal fluid

Tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is an emerging biomarker for guiding the personalized treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). While patients with CRC liver metastases (CRC-LM) have relatively high levels of plasma cfDNA, little is known about patients with CRC peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM). This study evaluated the presence of tumor-derived cfDNA in plasma and peritoneal fluid (i.e. ascites or peritoneal washing) in 20 patients with isolated CRC-PM and in the plasma of 100 patients with isolated CRC-LM. Among tumor tissue KRAS/BRAF mutation carriers, tumor-derived cfDNA was detected by droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) in plasma of 93% of CRC-LM and 20% of CRC-PM patients and in peritoneal fluid in all CRC-PM patients. Mutant allele fraction (MAF) and mutant copies per ml (MTc/ml) were lower in CRC-PM plasma than in CRC-LM plasma (median MAF = 0.28 versus 18.9%, p < 0.0001; median MTc/ml = 21 versus 1,758, p < 0.0001). Within patients with CRC-PM, higher cfDNA levels were observed in peritoneal fluid than in plasma (median MAF = 16.4 versus 0.28%, p = 0.0019; median MTc/ml = 305 versus 21, p = 0.0034). These data imply that tumor-derived cfDNA in plasma is a poor biomarker to monitor CRC-PM. Instead, cfDNA detection in peritoneal fluid may offer an alternative to guide CRC-PM treatment decisions

Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) with oxaliplatin as a palliative monotherapy for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a Dutch, multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study (CRC-PIPAC)

Introduction: Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX) is offered as a palliative treatment option for patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in several centres worldwide. However, little is known about its feasibility, safety, tolerability, efficacy, costs and pharmacokinetics in this setting. This study aims to explore these parameters in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal PM who receive repetitive ePIPAC-OX as a palliative monotherapy. Methods and analysis: This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals for the surgical treatment of colorectal PM. Eligible patients are adults who have histologically or cytologically proven isolated unresectable PM of a colorectal or appendiceal carcinoma, a good performance status, adequate organ functions and no symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction. Instead of standard palliative treatment, enrolled patients receive laparoscopy-controlled ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 body surface area (BSA)) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m 2 BSA) and bolus 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 BSA) every 6 weeks. Four weeks after each procedure, patients undergo clinical, radiological and biochemical evaluation. ePIPAC-OX is repeated until disease progression, after which standard palliative treatment is (re)considered. The primary outcome is the number of patients with major toxicity (grade ≥3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) up to 4 weeks after the last ePIPAC-OX. Secondary outcomes are the environmental safety of ePIPAC-OX, procedure-related characteristics, minor toxicity, postoperative complications, hospital stay, readmissions, quality of life, costs, pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, progression-free survival, overall survival, and the radiological, histopathological, cytological, biochemical and macroscopic tumour response. Ethics and dissemination: This study is approved by an ethics committee, the Dutch competent authority and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results are intended for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and for presentation to patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders

Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) with oxaliplatin as a palliative monotherapy for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases:protocol of a Dutch, multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study (CRC-PIPAC)

\u3cp\u3eIntroduction: Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX) is offered as a palliative treatment option for patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in several centres worldwide. However, little is known about its feasibility, safety, tolerability, efficacy, costs and pharmacokinetics in this setting. This study aims to explore these parameters in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal PM who receive repetitive ePIPAC-OX as a palliative monotherapy. Methods and analysis: This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals for the surgical treatment of colorectal PM. Eligible patients are adults who have histologically or cytologically proven isolated unresectable PM of a colorectal or appendiceal carcinoma, a good performance status, adequate organ functions and no symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction. Instead of standard palliative treatment, enrolled patients receive laparoscopy-controlled ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m \u3csup\u3e2\u3c/sup\u3e body surface area (BSA)) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m \u3csup\u3e2\u3c/sup\u3e BSA) and bolus 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m \u3csup\u3e2\u3c/sup\u3e BSA) every 6 weeks. Four weeks after each procedure, patients undergo clinical, radiological and biochemical evaluation. ePIPAC-OX is repeated until disease progression, after which standard palliative treatment is (re)considered. The primary outcome is the number of patients with major toxicity (grade ≥3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) up to 4 weeks after the last ePIPAC-OX. Secondary outcomes are the environmental safety of ePIPAC-OX, procedure-related characteristics, minor toxicity, postoperative complications, hospital stay, readmissions, quality of life, costs, pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, progression-free survival, overall survival, and the radiological, histopathological, cytological, biochemical and macroscopic tumour response. Ethics and dissemination: This study is approved by an ethics committee, the Dutch competent authority and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results are intended for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and for presentation to patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders. \u3c/p\u3