Search

Geert A Simkens,1,2 Anne GWE Wintjens,3 Koen P Rovers,1 Simon W Nienhuijs,1 Ignace H de Hingh1,4 1Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; 2Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 3NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 4GROW - School for Oncology and Development Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The NetherlandsCorrespondence: Geert A SimkensCatharina Cancer Institute, PO 1350, Eindhoven, 5602 ZA, The NetherlandsTel +31 40 2399111Email geert.simkens@catharinaziekenhuis.nlAbstract: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), often combined with systemic therapy, can be offered to selected colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) patients. However, clinical heterogeneity and the lack of high-level evidence challenges determination of the correct treatment strategy. This review aims to provide an overview of current strategies to predict survival of colorectal PM patients treated with CRS and HIPEC, guiding clinicians to select a suitable treatment-strategy and to inform patients about their prognosis. First, the prognostic relevance of several clinicopathological prognostic factors, such as extent of PM, location of primary tumor, histology type, and the presence of lymph node or liver metastases will be discussed. Subsequently, special attention will be given to recent developments in several aspects of tumor biology such as RAF/RAS mutations, circulating tumor DNA, immunoprofiling, and consensus molecular subtypes. Finally, currently available prognostic models to predict survival will be evaluated, concluding these models perform moderate to good, but most of them partly rely on intra-operative data. New insights in tumor biology, as well as the reliable assessment of extent of peritoneal disease by diffusion weighted MRI pose promising opportunities to establish an adequate and clinically meaningful preoperative prognostic model in the near future.Keywords: colorectal neoplasms, peritoneal metastases, cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, prognosis, survival

Geert A Simkens, Koen P Rovers, Simon W Nienhuijs, Ignace H de Hingh Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Abstract: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a viable option for selected patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal origin, resulting in long-term survival and even cure in some cases. However, adequate patient selection for this treatment is currently one of the major challenges. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of clinically relevant factors associated with overall survival. This may help to guide clinicians through the complex interplay of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics to adequately select patients who benefit the most from this extensive surgical treatment. First, basic principles of colorectal PM and the CRS and HIPEC treatment will be discussed. According to available literature, especially extent of peritoneal disease, completeness of cytoreduction, and signet ring cell histology have great influence on the outcome after CRS and HIPEC. Other factors that seem to have a negative prognostic value are the presence of liver metastases and the absence of treatment with neo-adjuvant systemic therapy. Prognostic models combining the above-mentioned factors, such as the Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Prognostic Surgical Score nomogram, may provide clinically relevant tools to use in everyday practice. Keywords: cytoreductive, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, colorectal neoplasms, peritoneal metastases, prognostic factors

Background: Palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic precipitation oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has never been prospectively investigated in patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The CRC-PIPAC-II study aimed to assess safety, feasibility and efficacy of such bidirectional therapy., Methods: This two-center, single-arm, phase II trial enrolled chemotherapy-naïve patients to undergo three treatment cycles, consisting of systemic therapy (CAPOX, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or FOLFOXIRI, all with bevacizumab) and oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC (92 mg/m 2 ) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m 2 ) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 ). Primary outcome were major treatment-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included minor events, tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Twenty patients completed 52 treatment cycles. Fifteen major events occurred in 7 patients (35 %): 5 events (33 %) related to systemic therapy; 5 (33 %) related to ePIPAC; and 5 (33 %) were biochemical events. No treatment-related deaths occurred. All patients experienced minor events, mostly abdominal pain, nausea and peripheral sensory neuropathy. After treatment, radiological, pathological, cytological, and biochemical response was observed in 0 %, 88 %, 38 %, and 31 % of patients respectively. Curative surgery was achieved in one patient. Median PFS was 10.0 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.0-13.0) and median OS was 17.5 months (95 % CI 13.0-not reached)., Conclusions: Combining palliative systemic therapy with oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC in patients with unresectable CPM was feasible and showed an acceptable safety profile. Treatment-induced response and survival are promising, yet further research is required to determine the additional value of ePIPAC to systemic therapy., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: To improve care for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) or pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), the Dutch CRS-HIPEC quality registry was initiated in 2019. The aims are to describe the development and content of this registry and to give insight into the data collected during the first years., Materials and Methods: The registry is an observational cohort in the Netherlands. All patients with CRC-PM or PMP who intend to undergo cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) from 6 hospitals are included. Clinical data and outcomes (including hospital variation) were analyzed., Results: In 2019-2022, 889 patients were included in the CRS-HIPEC quality registry: 749 (84 %) with CRC-PM and 140 (16 %) with PMP. Peritoneal metastases were diagnosed synchronously in 51 % of CRC-PM patients and in 94 % of PMP patients. In patients undergoing complete CRS, the median peritoneal cancer index was 8 (IQR 4-13) for CRC-PM and 15 (IQR 6-26) for PMP. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 639 CRC-PM patients (97 %) and 108 PMP patients (82 %). HIPEC was mainly performed with mitomycin C (CRC-PM: 94 %, PMP: 92 %). Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) occurred in 148 CRC-PM patients (22 %) and 30 PMP patients (23 %) with 90-day mortality rates of 2 %. In CRC-PM, differences between hospitals were observed regarding proportions of diagnostic laparoscopies/laparotomies, (neo)adjuvant treatment, ostomy formations and re-admissions., Conclusion: The CRS-HIPEC quality registry provides insight into the outcomes of CRS-HIPEC and enables clinical auditing and observational cohort studies aiming to improve treatment outcomes for patients with CRC-PM and PMP., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

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 < 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)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Limited data are available to guide the decision-making process for clinicians and their patients regarding palliative treatment options for patients with isolated synchronous colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM). Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the outcome of the different palliative treatments for these patients. All patients diagnosed with isolated synchronous CRC-PM between 2009 and 2020 (Netherlands Cancer Registry) who underwent palliative treatment were included. Patients who underwent emergency surgery or curative intent treatment were excluded. Patients were categorized into upfront palliative primary tumor resection (with or without additional systemic treatment) or palliative systemic treatment only. Overall survival (OS) was compared between both groups and multivariable cox regression analysis was performed. Of 1031 included patients, 364 (35%) patients underwent primary tumor resection and 667 (65%) patients received systemic treatment only. Sixty-day mortality was 9% in the primary tumor resection group and 5% in the systemic treatment group (P = 0.007). OS was 13.8 months in the primary tumor resection group and 10.3 months in the systemic treatment group (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that primary tumor resection was associated with improved OS (HR 0.68; 95%CI 0.57-0.81; P < 0.001). Palliative primary tumor resection appeared to be associated with improved survival compared to palliative systemic treatment alone in patients with isolated synchronous CRC-PM despite a higher 60-day mortality. This finding must be interpreted with care as residual bias probably played a significant role. Nevertheless, this option may be considered in the decision-making process by clinicians and their patients., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: As part of a randomized phase II trial in patients with isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPMs), the present study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients treated with perioperative systemic therapy versus cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone. Also, PROs of patients receiving perioperative systemic therapy were explored., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were randomized to perioperative systemic therapy (experimental) or CRS-HIPEC alone (control). PROs were assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires at baseline, after neoadjuvant treatment (experimental), and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Linear mixed modeling was used to compare five predefined PROs (visual analog scale, global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, C30 summary score) between arms and to longitudinally analyze PROs in the experimental arm., Results: Of 79 analyzed patients, 37 (47%) received perioperative systemic therapy. All predefined PROs were comparable between arms at all timepoints and returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. The experimental arm had worsening of fatigue [mean difference (MD) + 14, p = 0.001], loss of appetite (MD + 15, p = 0.003), hair loss (MD + 18, p < 0.001), and loss of taste (MD + 27, p < 0.001) after neoadjuvant treatment. Except for loss of appetite, these PROs returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively., Conclusions: In patients with resectable CPM randomized to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone, PROs were comparable between arms and returned to baseline postoperatively. Together with the trial's previously reported feasibility and safety data, these findings show acceptable tolerability of perioperative systemic therapy in this setting., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

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/m 2 ) and cisplatin (10.5 mg/m 2 ) was endorsed by 20/22 experts (90.9%). 16/22 (72.7%) supported oxaliplatin at 120 with potential reduction to 90 mg/m 2 (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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The following disclosure were made: MH: 1. Research funding (institution): Nestlé health science. 2. Speaker honorary (institution): MSD, Nestlé, Fresenius, Capnomed, Encare. 3. Boards: ERAS society: chair education, ISSPP: chair education. MR: 1.Research funding: Capnomed GmbH, Fisher Paykel, Alesi Surgical. 2. Speaker honorary: Boerhinger Ingelheim. 3. Stock shareholder: Capnomed GmbH. MP: Research funding: Capnomed GmbH, IDmed, INSERM laboratory unit. XD: Speaker honorary: Capnomed GmbH, Consultant for Latin America. WPY: Speaker honorary: Astra Zeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis. The rest of the authors have no competing interests., (© 2022 Olivia Sgarbura et al., published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.)

Background: Despite its increasing use, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (PIPAC-OX) has never been prospectively investigated as a palliative monotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases in clinical trials. This trial aimed to assess the safety (primary aim) and antitumor activity (key secondary aim) of PIPAC-OX monotherapy in patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases., Methods: In this two-center, single-arm, phase II trial, patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases in any line of palliative treatment underwent 6-weekly PIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 ). Key outcomes were major treatment-related adverse events (primary outcome), minor treatment-related adverse events, hospital stay, tumor response (radiological, biochemical, pathological, ascites), progression-free survival, and overall survival., Results: Twenty enrolled patients underwent 59 (median 3, range 1-6) PIPAC-OX procedures. Major treatment-related adverse events occurred in 3 of 20 (15%) patients after 5 of 59 (8%) procedures (abdominal pain, intraperitoneal hemorrhage, iatrogenic pneumothorax, transient liver toxicity), including one possibly treatment-related death (sepsis of unknown origin). Minor treatment-related adverse events occurred in all patients after 57 of 59 (97%) procedures, the most common being abdominal pain (all patients after 88% of procedures) and nausea (65% of patients after 39% of procedures). Median hospital stay was 1 day (range 0-3). Response rates were 0% (radiological), 50% (biochemical), 56% (pathological), and 56% (ascites). Median progression-free and overall survival were 3.5 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5-5.7) and 8.0 months (IQR 6.3-12.6), respectively., Conclusions: In patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases undergoing PIPAC-OX monotherapy, some major adverse events occurred and minor adverse events were common. The clinical relevance of observed biochemical, pathological, and ascites responses remains to be determined, especially since radiological response was absent., (© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Importance: To date, no randomized clinical trials have investigated perioperative systemic therapy relative to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone for resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM)., Objective: To assess the feasibility and safety of perioperative systemic therapy in patients with resectable CPM and the response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment., Design, Setting, and Participants: An open-label, parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial in all 9 Dutch tertiary centers for the surgical treatment of CPM enrolled participants between June 15, 2017, and January 9, 2019. Participants were patients with pathologically proven isolated resectable CPM who did not receive systemic therapy within 6 months before enrollment., Interventions: Randomization to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone. Perioperative systemic therapy comprised either four 3-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), six 2-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin), or six 2-week neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and either four 3-week adjuvant cycles of capecitabine or six 2-week adjuvant cycles of fluorouracil with leucovorin. Bevacizumab was added to the first 3 (CAPOX) or 4 (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles., Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity. Key secondary outcomes were centrally assessed rates of objective radiologic and major pathologic response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Analyses were done modified intention-to-treat in patients starting neoadjuvant treatment (experimental arm) or undergoing upfront surgery (control arm)., Results: In 79 patients included in the analysis (43 [54%] men; mean [SD] age, 62 [10] years), experimental (n = 37) and control (n = 42) arms did not differ significantly regarding the proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC (33 of 37 [89%] vs 36 of 42 [86%] patients; risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.23; P = .74) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity (8 of 37 [22%] vs 14 of 42 [33%] patients; risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.37; P = .25). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Objective radiologic and major pathologic response rates of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment were 28% (9 of 32 evaluable patients) and 38% (13 of 34 evaluable patients), respectively., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized phase 2 trial in patients diagnosed with resectable CPM, perioperative systemic therapy seemed feasible, safe, and able to induce response of CPM, justifying a phase 3 trial., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02758951.

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., (© 2021 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology: Clinical Research published by The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland & John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is an emerging palliative treatment for patients with unresectable peritoneal metastases. Potential advantages of PIPAC over current treatment options are a homogeneous intraperitoneal distribution, low local and systemic toxicity, and enhanced tumour penetration. Given these possible benefits, PIPAC is increasingly implemented in many centres worldwide. Scientific research into PIPAC is currently available from in vitro / in vivo /in animal studies, retrospective cohorts in humans, and phase I and II studies in humans. There are no results from randomised trials comparing PIPAC with conventional treatment, such as palliative systemic therapy. This narrative review aimed to provide an overview of the currently available literature on PIPAC. In general, repetitive PIPAC was feasible and safe for patients and operating room personnel. Primary and secondary non-access rates varied from 0-17% and 0-15%, respectively. Iatrogenic bowel injury was observed in 0-3% of PIPAC procedures. CTCAE grade 1-2 complications were common, mostly consisting of abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. CTCAE grade 3-4 complications were uncommon, occurring on 0-15% of PIPAC procedures. Post-operative mortality rates of 0-2% were reported. The risk of occupational exposure to cytotoxic drugs was very low when strict safety guidelines were followed. Clinical heterogeneity was high in most studies, since, in general, patients with unresectable peritoneal metastases from a variety of primary tumours were included. Also, patients received either PIPAC monotherapy or PIPAC combined with concomitant systemic therapy, and were able to receive PIPAC in any line of palliative treatment. Since the results were generally not stratified for these three important factors, this severely complicates the interpretation of results. Based on the current literature, PIPAC may be regarded as a promising palliative treatment option in patients with diffuse peritoneal metastases. Initial results show that it is feasible and safe. However, well designed and (ideally) randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to determine the additional value of PIPAC in this setting. Until then, PIPAC should preferably be performed in the setting of clinical trials., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-20-497). The focused issue was sponsored by the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI). KVDS served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the focused issue. IHJT de Hingh received unrestricted grants from Roche, QP&S, and RanD Biotech, paid to the institute, outside the submitted work. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (PIPAC-OX) is increasingly used as a palliative treatment option for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The present study aimed to systematically review all clinical studies reporting safety and efficacy outcomes of PIPAC-OX in patients with CPM. PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were systematically searched to identify all clinical studies that included at least one patient with CPM treated with PIPAC-OX and reported one of the following outcomes: adverse events, tumor response, quality of life, secondary cytoreductive surgery, progression-free survival, overall survival, and environmental safety of PIPAC-OX. Results were narratively described. Of 28 included studies, only 14 non-comparative studies separately reported at least one outcome of PIPAC-OX for CPM, of which only two studies specifically focused on this group. These 14 studies reported adverse events (5 studies), tumor response (5 studies), secondary cytoreductive surgery (4 studies), progression-free survival (1 study), overall survival (5 studies), and environmental safety (2 studies). Except for 5 studies (describing 26 patients), none of the included studies stratified their results for PIPAC-OX monotherapy and PIPAC-OX with concomitant systemic therapy, and none of the studies reporting survival outcomes stratified results for line of palliative treatment, complicating interpretation. No PIPAC-OX related deaths were reported. No occupational platinum was detected during PIPAC-OX. The available evidence regarding PIPAC-OX for CPM is limited and difficult to interpret. Despite these limitations, PIPAC-OX appears safe in patients with CPM and safe for operating personnel. To increase insight in the role of PIPAC-OX in this setting, investigators of ongoing and future studies are encouraged to report separate outcomes of PIPAC-OX for CPM, to stratify their results for PIPAC-OX monotherapy and PIPAC-OX with concomitant systemic therapy, and to stratify survival results for line of palliative treatment., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-20-257). The focused issue was sponsored by the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI). IHJH reports grants from ROCHE, grants from RanD Biotech, outside the submitted work. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Despite its increasing use, first-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX), hereinafter referred to as first-line bidirectional therapy, has never been prospectively investigated in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). As a first step to address this evidence gap, the present study aims to assess the safety, feasibility, antitumour activity, patient-reported outcomes, costs and systemic pharmacokinetics of first-line bidirectional therapy in patients with isolated unresectable CPM., Methods and Analysis: In this single-arm, phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 20 patients are enrolled. Key eligibility criteria are a good performance status, pathologically proven isolated unresectable CPM, no previous palliative systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, no (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy ≤6 months prior to enrolment and no previous pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Patients receive three cycles of bidirectional therapy. Each cycle consists of 6 weeks first-line palliative systemic therapy at the medical oncologists' decision (CAPOX-bevacizumab, FOLFOX-bevacizumab, FOLFIRI-bevacizumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab) followed by ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 ) with an intraoperative bolus of intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 ). Study treatment ends after the third ePIPAC-OX. The primary outcome is the number of patients with-and procedures leading to-grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0) up to 4 weeks after the last procedure. Key secondary outcomes include the number of bidirectional cycles in each patient, treatment-related characteristics, grade ≤2 adverse events, tumour response (histopathological, cytological, radiological, biochemical, macroscopic and ascites), patient-reported outcomes, systemic pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, costs, progression-free survival and overall survival., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by the Dutch competent authority, a medical ethics committee and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals., Trial Registration Number: NL8303., Competing Interests: Competing interests: IHJTH received grants, paid to the institute, from Roche, QP&S and RanD Biotech outside the submitted work. This manuscript is based on the study protocol version 4.0, 15 June 2020., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

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 at t = 0, t = 5, t = 10, t = 20, t = 30, t = 60, t = 120, t = 240, t = 360 and t = 1080 min for plasma and plasma ultrafiltrate concentrations; urine at t = 0, t = 1, t = 3, t = 5 and t = 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 ultrafiltrate C max of oxaliplatin reached 1.36-1.90 µg/mL after 30 min with an AUC 0-24 h of 9.6-11.7 µg/mL * h. The plasma C max reached 2.67-3.28 µg/mL after 90 min with an AUC 0-24 h of 49.0-59.5 µg/mL * h. The absorption rate constant (Ka) was 1.13/h. Urine concentrations of oxaliplatin rapidly decreased to less than 3.60 µg/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., Trial Registration: NCT03246321, Pre-results; ISRCTN89947480, Pre-results; NTR6603, Pre-results; EudraCT: 2017-000927-29, Pre-results.

Objectives: In the Netherlands, limited variability exists in performance of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) among centers treating colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM), except for the intraperitoneal drug administration. This offers a unique opportunity to investigate any disparities in survival between the two most frequently used HIPEC regimens worldwide: mitomycin C (MMC) and oxaliplatin., Methods: This was a comparative, population-based cohort study of all Dutch patients diagnosed with synchronous colorectal PM who underwent CRS-HIPEC between 2014 and 2017. They were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Main outcome was overall survival (OS). The effect of the intraperitoneal drug on OS was investigated using multivariable Cox regression analysis., Results: In total, 297 patients treated between 2014 and 2017 were included. Among them, 177 (59.6%) received MMC and 120 (40.4%) received oxaliplatin. Only primary tumor location was different between the two groups: more left-sided colon in the Oxaliplatin group (47.5% vs. 33.3%, respectively, p=0.048). The 1-, 2- and 3-year OS were 84.6% vs. 85.8%, 61.6% vs. 63.9% and 44.7% vs. 53.5% in patients treated with MMC and oxaliplatin, respectively. Median OS was 30.7 months in the MMC group vs. 46.6 months in the oxaliplatin group (p=0.181). In multivariable analysis, no influence of intraperitoneal drug on survival was observed (adjusted HR 0.77 [0.53-1.13])., Conclusions: Long-term survival between patients treated with either MMC or oxaliplatin during CRS-HIPEC was not significantly different., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: De Hingh: An unrestricted research grand from RanD/QPS and Roche, paid to the institute., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Importance: To date, there are no data on the value of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy following up-front resection of isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases., Objective: To assess the association between adjuvant systemic chemotherapy and overall survival following up-front resection of isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this population-based, observational cohort study using nationwide data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (diagnoses between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017; follow-up until January 31, 2019), 393 patients with isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases who were alive 3 months after up-front complete cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were included. Patients allocated to the adjuvant systemic chemotherapy group were matched (1:1) with those allocated to the active surveillance group by propensity scores based on patient-, tumor-, and treatment-level covariates., Exposures: Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy, defined as systemic chemotherapy without targeted therapy, starting within 3 months postoperatively., Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival was compared between matched groups using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis adjusted for residual imbalance. A landmark analysis was performed by excluding patients who died within 6 months postoperatively. A sensitivity analysis was performed to adjust for unmeasured confounding by major postoperative morbidity., Results: Of 393 patients (mean [SD] age, 61 [10] years; 181 [46%] men), 172 patients (44%) were allocated to the adjuvant systemic chemotherapy group. After propensity score matching of 142 patients in the adjuvant systemic chemotherapy group with 142 patients in the active surveillance group, adjuvant systemic chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival compared with active surveillance (median, 39.2 [interquartile range, 21.1-111.1] months vs 24.8 [interquartile range, 15.0-58.4] months; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.88; P = .006), which remained consistent after excluding patients who died within 6 months postoperatively (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.93; P = .02) and after adjustment for major postoperative morbidity (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.95)., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this study suggest that in patients undergoing up-front resection of isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases, adjuvant systemic chemotherapy appeared to be associated with improved overall survival. Although randomized trials are needed to address the influence of potential residual confounding and allocation bias on this association, results of this study may be used for clinical decision-making in this patient group for whom no data are available.

Introduction: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has become standard of care for patients with peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin with a low/moderate abdominal disease load. In case of a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score >20, CRS-HIPEC is not considered to be beneficial. Patients with a PCI >20 are currently offered palliative systemic chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown that systemic chemotherapy is less effective against peritoneal metastases than it is against haematogenous spread of colorectal cancer. It is suggested that patients with peritoneal metastases may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to systemic chemotherapy. Aim of this study is to establish the maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan, added to standard of care systemic therapy for colorectal cancer. Secondary endpoints are to determine the safety and feasibility of this treatment and to establish the pharmacokinetic profile of intraperitoneally administered irinotecan., Methods and Analysis: This phase I, '3+3' dose-escalation, study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral centres. The study population consists of adult patients with extensive peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin who have a good performance status and no extra-abdominal metastases. According to standard work-up for CRS-HIPEC, patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy to score the PCI. In case of a PCI >20, a peritoneal access port will be placed in the abdomen of the patient. Through this port we will administer intraperitoneal irinotecan, in combination with standard systemic treatment consisting of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin and the targeted agent bevacizumab. Therapy consists of a maximum of 12 cycles 2-weekly., Ethics and Dissemination: This study protocol is approved by a research medical ethics committee (Rotterdam, Netherlands) and the Dutch Competent Authority (CCMO, The Hague, Netherlands). The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal., Trail Registration Number: NL6988 and NL2018-000479-33; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer have a poor prognosis. If the intraperitoneal tumour load is limited, patients may be eligible for cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). This treatment has improved overall survival, but recurrence rates are high. The aim of this study was to create a preclinical platform for the development of more effective intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies., Methods: Using organoid technology, five tumour cultures were generated from malignant ascites and resected peritoneal metastases. These were used in an in vitro HIPEC model to assess sensitivity to mitomycin C (MMC) and oxaliplatin, the drugs used most commonly in HIPEC. The model was also used to test a rational combination treatment involving MMC and inhibitors of the checkpoint kinase ATR., Results: MMC was more effective in eliminating peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids than oxaliplatin at clinically relevant concentrations. However, the drug concentrations required to eliminate 50 per cent of the tumour cells (IC50) were higher than the median clinical dose in two of five organoid lines for MMC, and all five lines for oxaliplatin, indicating a general resistance to monotherapy. ATR inhibition increased the sensitivity of all peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids to MMC, as the IC50 decreased 2·6-12·4-fold to well below concentrations commonly attained in clinical practice. Live-cell imaging and flow cytometric analysis showed that ATR inhibition did not release cells from MMC-induced cell cycle arrest, but caused increased replication stress and accelerated cell death., Conclusion: Peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids can be used to evaluate existing HIPEC regimens on an individual-patient level and for development of more effective treatment strategies. Surgical relevance Cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has improved prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer, but disease recurrence is common. More effective and personalized HIPEC is urgently needed. Organoid technology is frequently used for drug screens, as patient-derived organoids can accurately predict clinical therapeutic response in vitro. A panel of organoids was established from peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer and used to develop a model for testing HIPEC regimens in vitro. Patient-derived organoids differed in sensitivity to commonly used chemotherapeutics, in line with variable clinical outcomes following cytoreductive surgery-HIPEC. Combining MMC with an ATR inhibitor improved the efficacy of MMC. Peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids can be used as a platform to test novel (combination) strategies that increase HIPEC efficacy. In the future, organoids could be used to select patent-tailored HIPEC regimens., (© 2019 The Authors. BJS published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

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., Trial Registration Number: NCT03246321, Pre-results; ISRCTN89947480, Pre-results; NTR6603, Pre-results; EudraCT: 2017-000927-29, Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Careful selection of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is crucial. It remains unknown whether the time of onset of colorectal PM (synchronous vs metachronous) influences surgical morbidity and survival outcomes after CRS with HIPEC., Methods: Patients with histologically proven colorectal PM who underwent CRS with HIPEC between February 2006 and December 2017 in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals were retrospectively included from a prospectively maintained database. The onset of colorectal PM was classified as synchronous (PM diagnosed at the initiational presentation with colorectal cancer) or metachronous (PM diagnosed after initial curative colorectal resection). Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between patients with synchronous colorectal PM and those with metachronous colorectal PM using Kaplan-Meier analyses, proportional hazard analyses, and a multivariate Cox regression analysis., Results: The study enrolled 433 patients, of whom 231 (53%) had synchronous colorectal PM and 202 (47%) had metachronous colorectal PM. The major postoperative complication rate and median OS were similar between the patients with synchronous colorectal PM and those with metachronous colorectal PM (26.8% vs 29.7%; p = 0.693 and 34 vs 33 months, respectively; p = 0.819). The median DFS was significantly decreased for the patients with metachronous colorectal PM and those with synchronous colorectal PM (11 vs 15 months; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.26)., Conclusions: Metachronous onset of colorectal PM is associated with early recurrence after CRS with HIPEC compared with synchronous colorectal PM, without a difference in OS or major postoperative complications. Time to onset of colorectal PM should be taken into consideration to optimize patient selection for this major procedure.

Background: Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes., Methods: This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0-10 or 11-20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician's discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates., Discussion: This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov/ NCT02758951 , NTR/ NTR6301 , ISRCTN/ ISRCTN15977568 , EudraCT/ 2016-001865-99 .

Background: At present, selected patients with resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) are increasingly treated with a combination therapy of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The aim of this study was to investigate the current worldwide practice., Methods: HIPEC experts from 19 countries were invited through the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) to complete an online survey concerning their personal expertise and current hospital and countrywide practice., Results: It is estimated that currently more than 3800 patients with CRC-PM (synchronous and metachronous) are annually treated with CRS and HIPEC in 430 centers. Integration of CRS and HIPEC in national guidelines varies, resulting in large treatment disparities between countries. Amongst the experts, there was general agreement on issues related to indication, surgical technique and follow up but less on systemic chemotherapy or proactive strategies., Conclusion: This international survey demonstrates that CRS and HIPEC is now performed on a large scale for CRC-PM patients. Variation in treatment may result in heterogeneity in surgical and oncological outcomes, emphasising the necessity to reach consensus on several issues of this comprehensive procedure. Future initiatives directed at achieving an international consensus statement are needed., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improve the survival of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases. Patient selection is key since this treatment is associated with high morbidity. Patients with peritoneal recurrence within 1 year after previous adjuvant chemotherapy are thought to benefit less from HIPEC treatment; however, no published data are available to assist in clinical decision making. This study assessed whether peritoneal recurrence within 1 year after adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with survival after HIPEC treatment., Methods: Peritoneal recurrence within 1 year after adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as other potentially prognostic clinical and pathological variables, were tested in univariate and multivariate analysis for correlation with primary outcomes, i.e. overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Two prospectively collected databases from the VU University Medical Center Amsterdam and Catherina Hospital Eindhoven containing 345 CRC patients treated with the intent of HIPEC were utilized., Results: High Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) scores were associated with worse DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.08, p = 0.040] and OS (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07-1.15, p < 0.001) in multivariate analysis. Furthermore, patients with peritoneal recurrence within 1 year following adjuvant chemotherapy had worse DFS (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.26-3.61, p = 0.005) and OS (HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.45-5.27, p = 0.002) than patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy or patients with peritoneal recurrence after 1 year., Conclusion: Peritoneal recurrence within 1 year after previous adjuvant chemotherapy, as well as high PCI scores, are associated with poor survival after cytoreduction and HIPEC. These factors should be considered in order to avoid high-morbidity treatment in patients who might not benefit from such treatment.

Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is rare despite the fact that the small bowel represents the longest part and has the largest surface of all alimentary tract sections. Its incidence is 50-fold lower than that of colorectal carcinoma. It is often diagnosed at an advanced stage due to atypical and late symptoms, its low index of suspicion, difficult endoscopic access and poor detection by radiological imaging, resulting in impaired outcome. Due to its rarity and being molecularly a unique intestinal cancer, data regarding its optimal management are relatively sparse., Material and Methods: A PubMed search was performed to identify relevant manuscripts that were recently published. Emerging data regarding the pathogenesis, the diagnosis and the treatment of SBA that resulted from recent research are discussed in this comprehensive review., Results: Genomic analysis has demonstrated that SBA is a molecularly unique intestinal cancer. Double balloon enteroscopy and capsule endoscopy are novel techniques which may result in earlier diagnosis and consequently in improvement of the generally poor prognosis. For clinically localized disease, the quality of surgery has recently been defined, with removal of at least 8-10 lymph nodes correlating with improved prognosis. Moreover, adjuvant chemotherapy seems to improve outcome of stage III disease. The combination of a fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin appears to be the most effective systemic chemotherapy for disseminated disease. Genomic profiling can identify potentially targetable genomic alterations in a significant proportion of SBA patients. The role of administration of targeted agents or immune checkpoint inhibitors is still unknown and subject of ongoing clinical trials. In the common case of peritoneal metastases, recent studies have shown that cytoreductive surgery and intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy may be an attractive treatment option in selected patients., Conclusions: SBA is a rare and unique malignancy, whose diagnostic approach and treatment are evolving, resulting in improved outcome.

Complications after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) result in impaired short- and long-term outcomes. However, financial consequences of complications after CRS and HIPEC in a European health care setting are unknown. This study aims to assess the consequences of complications on hospital costs after CRS and HIPEC.In this prospective observational cohort study, patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with CRS and HIPEC were included. Financial information was collected according to the Dutch manual for costs analyses. Costs were compared between patients without complications (NC), minor complications (MC), or severe complications (SC), according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.One hundred and sixty-one patients were included, of whom 42% experienced NC, 27% MC and 31% SC. Mean hospital costs were &OV0556;9.406 ± 2.235 in NC patients, &OV0556;12.471 ± 3.893 in MC patients, and &OV0556;29.409 ± 22.340 in SC patients. The 31% of patients with severe complications accounted for 56% of all hospital costs. Hospital admission costs in SC patients were 320% higher compared to NC patients. Costs of complications were estimated to be 43% of all admission costs.Severe postoperative complications have major influence on costs after CRS and HIPEC and result in a threefold increase of hospital costs in affected patients. This finding stresses the need for adequate risk assessment of developing severe complications after CRS and HIPEC.

Background/purpose: Peritoneal metastases (PM) affect approximately one third of patients with metastatic small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). Treatment options are (1) systemic therapy ± palliative surgery and (2) cytoreductive surgery with intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + IPC). Due to scarce evidence, PM from SBA represents a therapeutic challenge. This narrative review summarised and discussed the evidence that investigated available treatment options., Methods: Studies were discussed if they investigated first line systemic therapy for advanced SBA or CRS + IPC for PM from SBA. Extracted outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and grade III-V toxicity/morbidity., Results: Eighteen studies (15 observational, 3 phase II) that investigated systemic therapy and six observational studies that investigated CRS + IPC were reviewed. In studies that investigated systemic therapy, ORR, DCR, median PFS, median OS, and grade III-V toxicity ranged from 6% to 50%, 50% to 90%, 3 to 11 months, 8 to 20 months, and 10% to 68%, respectively. Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin revealed favourable survival outcomes compared to fluoropyrimidine-irinotecan, fluoropyrimidine-cisplatin, fluoropyrimidine monotherapy, and other regimens. In studies that investigated CRS + IPC, median DFS, median OS, and grade III-V morbidity ranged from 10 to 12 months, 16 to 47 months, and 12% to 35%, respectively., Conclusion: Based on available evidence, fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin should be regarded as optimal first line systemic treatment. In selected patients, CRS + IPC appears safe and may be more effective than systemic therapy as single treatment. Future studies should evaluate survival and morbidity of CRS + IPC in larger cohorts, as well as the value of chemotherapy with targeted agents in metastatic SBA with subgroup analysis for PM from SBA.

Background/purpose: Despite its widespread use, no randomised studies have investigated the value of perioperative systemic therapy as adjunct to cytoreduction and HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases. This systematic review evaluated the available evidence, which consists of non-randomised studies only., Methods: A systematic search identified studies that investigated the influence of neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or perioperative systemic therapy on overall survival (OS)., Results: The 11 included studies (n=1708) were clinically heterogeneous and subject to selection bias. Studies on neoadjuvant systemic therapy revealed OS benefit (n=3), no OS benefit (n=1), and superiority of chemotherapy with bevacizumab vs. chemotherapy (n=2). Studies on adjuvant systemic therapy showed no OS benefit (n=3). Studies on perioperative systemic therapy demonstrated OS benefit (n=1), and superiority of modern vs. conventional systemic therapy(n=1)., Conclusion: Significant limitations of available evidence question the widespread use of perioperative systemic therapy in this setting, stress the need for randomised studies, and impede conclusions regarding optimal timing and regimens. Included studies may suggest a survival benefit of neoadjuvant systemic therapy., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the Netherlands, surgery for peritoneal metastases of colorectal cancer (PMCRC) is centralised, whereas PMCRC is diagnosed in all hospitals. This study assessed whether hospital of diagnosis affects treatment selection and overall survival (OS)., Methods: Between 2005 and 2015, all patients with synchronous PMCRC without systemic metastases were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Treatment was classified as cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC), systemic therapy or other/no treatment. Hospitals of diagnosis were classified as: (1) non-teaching or academic/teaching hospital and (2) HIPEC centre or referring hospital. Referring hospitals were further classified based on the frequency of CRS/HIPEC as high-, medium- or low-frequency hospital. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the independent influence of hospital categories on the likelihood of CRS/HIPEC and OS., Results: A total of 2661 patients, diagnosed in 89 hospitals, were included. At individual hospital level, CRS/HIPEC and systemic therapy ranged from 0% to 50% and 6% to 67%, respectively. Hospital of diagnosis influenced the likelihood of CRS/HIPEC: 33% versus 13% for HIPEC centres versus referring hospitals (odds ratio (OR) 3.66 [2.40-5.58]) and 11% versus 17% for non-teaching hospitals versus academic/teaching hospitals (OR 0.60 [0.47-0.77]). Hospital of diagnosis affected median OS: 14.1 versus 9.6 months for HIPEC centres versus referring hospitals (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82 [0.67-0.99]) and 8.7 versus 11.5 months for non-teaching hospitals versus academic/teaching hospitals (HR 1.15 [1.06-1.26]). Compared with diagnosis in medium-frequency referring hospitals, median OS was increased in high-frequency referring hospitals (12.6 months, HR 0.82 [0.73-0.91]) and reduced in low-frequency referring hospitals (8.1 months, HR 1.12 [1.01-1.24])., Conclusion: Treatment disparities among hospitals of diagnosis and their impact on survival indicate suboptimal treatment selection for PMCRC., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)