Indication of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer (Gastripec, Gastrichip)

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is associated with a poor prognosis mostly due to peritoneal metastasis, which will develop in time during the patient's disease history. To prevent and treat peritoneal metastasis, different kinds of treatment regimens have been described. Summary: In this review, we addressed two main topics - prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal metastasis in GC. Prevention should be directed towards diminishing cancer cell spillage and reducing adherence of cancer cells to the abdominal cavity. Postoperative washing of the abdomen with or without chemotherapy and additional heat are herein discussed. Key Messages: Treatment of existing peritoneal metastasis is effective in patients with limited disease and tumour spread. Cytoreductive surgery including resection of peritoneal metastasis followed directly with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy can increase overall survival and progression-free survival in selected patients. Drugs, duration and time schedules of intraperitoneal chemotherapy are reviewed and presented. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy seems to improve the prognosis of patients with GC and peritoneal metastasis after complete resection of both primary and metastatic tumours

Preoperative chemoradiation with paclitaxel-carboplatin or with fluorouracil-oxaliplatin-folinic acid (FOLFOX) for resectable esophageal and junctional cancer: the PROTECT-1402, randomized phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Often curative treatment for locally advanced resectable esophageal or gastro-esophageal junctional cancer consists of concurrent neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy followed by surgery. Currently, one of the most commonly used chemotherapy regimens in this setting is a combination of a fluoropyrimidin and of a platinum analogue. Due to the promising results of the recent CROSS trial, another regimen combining paclitaxel and carboplatin is also widely used by European and American centers. No clinical study has shown the superiority of one treatment over the other. The objective of this Phase II study is to clarify clinical practice by comparing these two chemotherapy treatments. Our aim is to evaluate, in operable esophageal and gastro-esophageal junctional cancer, the complete resection rate and severe postoperative morbidity rate associated with these two neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic regimens (carboplatin-paclitaxel or fluorouracil-oxaliplatin-folinic acid) when each is combined with the radiation regime utilized in the CROSS trial. METHODS/DESIGN: PROTECT is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, open arms, phase II trial. Eligible patients will have a histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and be treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy followed by surgery for stage IIB or stage III resectable esophageal cancer. A total of 106 patients will be randomized to receive either 3 cycles of FOLFOX combined to concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Grays) or carboplatin and paclitaxel with the same radiation regimen, using a 1:1 allocation ratio. DISCUSSION: This ongoing trial offers the unique opportunity to compare two standards of chemotherapy delivered with a common regimen of preoperative radiation, in the setting of operable locally advanced esophageal or gastro-esophageal junctional tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02359968 (ClinicalTrials.gov) (registration date: 9 FEB 2015), EudraCT: 2014-000649-62 (registration date: 10 FEB 2014)

Descriptive review of current practices and prognostic factors in patients with ovarian cancer treated by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): a multicentric, retrospective, cohort of 234 patients

IntroductionOvarian cancer (OC) is the primary cause of mortality in women diagnosed with gynecological cancer. Our study assessed pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) as treatment for peritoneal surface metastases (PSM) from recurrent or progressive OC and conducted survival analyses to identify prognostic factors.Material and methodsThis retrospective cohort study, conducted across 18 international centers, analyzed the clinical practices of patients receiving palliative treatment for PSM from OC who underwent PIPAC. All patients were initially treated appropriately outside any clinical trial setting. Feasibility, safety, and morbidity were evaluated along with objective endpoints of oncological response. Multivariate analysis identified prognostic factors for OS and PFS.ResultsFrom 2015-2020, 234 consecutive patients were studied, from which 192 patients were included and stratified by platinum sensitivity for analysis. Patients with early recurrence, within one postoperative month, were excluded. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding platinum sensitivity (platinum sensitive (PS) and resistant (PR)), but chemotherapy frequency differed, as did PCI before PIPAC. Median PCI decreased in both groups after three cycles of PIPAC (PS 16 vs. 12, p < 0.001; PR 24 vs. 20, p = 0.009). Overall morbidity was 22%, with few severe complications (4-8%) or mortality (0-3%). Higher pathological response and longer OS (22 vs. 11m, p = 0.012) and PFS (12 vs. 7m, p = 0.033) were observed in the PS group. Multivariate analysis (OS/PFS) identified ascites (HR 4.02, p < 0.001/5.22, p < 0.001), positive cytology at first PIPAC (HR 3.91, p = 0.002/1.96, p = 0.035), and ≥ 3 PIPACs (HR 0.30, p = 0.002/0.48, p = 0.017) as independent prognostic factors of overall survival/progression-free survival.ConclusionsWith low morbidity and mortality rates, PIPAC is a safe option for palliative treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Promising results were observed after 3 PIPAC, which did improve the peritoneal burden. However, further research is needed to evaluate the potential role of PIPAC as an independent prognostic factor

Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks