Prognostic impact of combined progression index based on peritoneal grading regression score and peritoneal cytology in peritoneal metastasis.
Adult
Aerosols
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Agents
/ administration & dosage
Biopsy
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
/ methods
Cytodiagnosis
/ methods
Disease Progression
Drug Delivery Systems
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
/ methods
Neoplasm Metastasis
/ diagnosis
Peritoneal Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Prognosis
Progression-Free Survival
Prospective Studies
PIPAC
PRGS
peritoneal cytology
pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy
tumour regression grading
Journal
Histopathology
ISSN: 1365-2559
Titre abrégé: Histopathology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7704136
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
17
10
2019
revised:
10
02
2020
accepted:
11
02
2020
pubmed:
16
2
2020
medline:
27
7
2021
entrez:
16
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) and peritoneal cytology (PC) assess response to chemotherapy in peritoneal metastasis (PM) in a setting of palliative treatment by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Progression has been defined as an increase of PRGS between first and third PIPAC procedures (iPRGS). iPRGSand positive peritoneal cytology were not associated with prognostic impact. These results may be explained by a lack of statistical power. Also, it is not known whether the mean or the highest PRGS among taken peritoneal biopsies bears the highest clinical value. We therefore conducted the largest prospective study to investigate the prognostic impact of PGRS, PC, and their combination, designated as combined progression index (CPI). Patients with PM who underwent >3 PIPAC (n = 112) between December 2016 and February 2019 were prospectively included. A significant difference in OS and PFS according to CPI (used highest value of PRGS) was found (OS: CPI-, 83.3, 95% CI [49.8; NA] vs. CPI+, 48.1, 95% CI [38.5; 66.4] months; and PFS (respectively, 59.7, 95% CI [43.0; 96.0] vs. 33.7, 95% CI [30.4; 44.2] months). PRGS or PC had no independent prognostic impact. CPI+ was an independent predictor of worse prognosis, in OS (HR = 5.24, 95% CI [2.07; 13.26]), and PFS (HR = 4.41, 95% CI [1.40; 13.88]). The CPI based on highest PRGS and PC was found to be independently associated with a worse prognosis for OS and for PFS in the setting of peritoneal metastasis. These results indicate that it should be of interest to systematically take peritoneal fluid for cytological examination and to implement the CPI in the therapeutic decision-making process in the context of PIPAC.
Substances chimiques
Aerosols
0
Antineoplastic Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
548-559Informations de copyright
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Neuwirth MG, Alexander HR, Karakousis GC. Then and now: cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), a historical perspective. J. Gastrointest. Oncol. 2016; 7; 18-28.
Chia CS, You B, Decullier E et al. Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: is cure a possibility? Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2016; 23; 1971-1979.
Yan TD, Deraco M, Baratti D et al. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: multi-institutional experience. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009; 27; 6237-6242.
Chua TC, Moran BJ, Sugarbaker PH et al. Early- and long-term outcome data of patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei from appendiceal origin treated by a strategy of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012; 30; 2449-2456.
Trilling B, Cotte E, Vaudoyer D et al. Intraperitoneal-free cancer cells represent a major prognostic factor in colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis. Dis. Colon Rectum 2016; 59; 615-622.
van Driel W, Koole SN, Sikorska K et al. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018; 378; 230-240.
Solass W, Kerb R, Mürdter T et al. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy of peritoneal carcinomatosis using pressurized aerosol as an alternative to liquid solution: first evidence for efficacy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2014; 21; 553-559.
Alyami M, Hübner M, Grass F et al. Pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy: rationale, evidence, and potential indications. Lancet Oncol. 2019; 20; e368-e377.
Alyami M, Gagniere J, Sgarbura O et al. Multicentric initial experience with the use of the pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) in the management of unresectable peritoneal carcinomatosis. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017; 43; 2178-2183.
Solass W, Herbette A, Schwarz T et al. Therapeutic approach of human peritoneal carcinomatosis with Dbait in combination with capnoperitoneum: proof of concept. Surg. Endosc. 2012; 26; 847-852.
Demtröder C, Solass W, Zieren J, Strumberg D, Giger-Pabst U, Reymond MA. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin in colorectal peritoneal metastasis. Colorect. Dis. 2016; 18; 364-371.
Odendahl K, Solass W, Demtröder C et al. Quality of life of patients with end-stage peritoneal metastasis treated with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2015; 41; 1379-1385.
Graversen M, Detlefsen S, Bjerregaard JK, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Peritoneal metastasis from pancreatic cancer treated with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Clin. Exp. Metastasis 2017; 34; 309-314.
Graversen M, Detlefsen S, Bjerregaard JK, Fristrup CW, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Prospective, single-center implementation and response evaluation of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) for peritoneal metastasis. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 2018; 10; 758835918777036.
Low RN. Preoperative and surveillance MR imaging of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J. Gastrointest. Oncol. 2016; 7; 58-71.
Lambert LA. Looking up: recent advances in understanding and treating peritoneal carcinomatosis. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2015; 65; 283-298.
Solass W, Sempoux C, Detlefsen S, Carr NJ, Bibeau F. Peritoneal sampling and histological assessment of therapeutic response in peritoneal metastasis: proposal of the peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS). Pleura Peritoneum 2016; 1; 99-107.
Solass W, Sempoux C, Carr NJ et al. Reproducibility of the peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) for assessment of response to therapy in peritoneal metastasis. Histopathology 2019; 74; 1014-1024.
Solass W, Kurtz F, Struller F et al. Prognostic value of peritoneal grading regression score (PRGS) in peritoneal metastasis: an exploratory analysis on registry data (published abstract). Pleura Peritoneum 2018; 1(Special; suppl.); sA27.
Graversen M, Fristrup C, Kristensen TK et al. Detection of free intraperitoneal tumour cells in peritoneal lavage fluid from patients with peritoneal metastasis before and after treatment with pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). J. Clin. Pathol. 2019; 72; 368-372.
Villeneuve L, Jourdan-Enfer P, Bibeau F et al. Biobank-based research on digestive peritoneal carcinomatosis (the BIG-RENAPE Biobank). Pleura Peritoneum 2016; 1; 12.
Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2013. Available right now at: http://www.r-project.org/
Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013; 48; 452-458.
Low RN, Barone RM, Rousset P. Peritoneal MRI in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: history, clinical applications, and implementation. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2019; S0748-7983; 30303-30308.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2019.02.030
Jacquet P, Sugarbaker PH. Clinical research methodologies in diagnosis and staging of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer Treat. Res. 1996; 82; 359-374.
Hynninen J, Lavonius M, Oksa S, Grénman S, Carpén O, Auranen A. Is perioperative visual estimation of intra-abdominal tumor spread reliable in ovarian cancer surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Gynecol. Oncol. 2013; 128; 229-232.
Taibi A, Lo Dico R, Kaci R et al. Evaluation of a new histological grading system for assessing the response to chemotherapy of peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer: a mouse model study. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2020; 46; 160-165.
Yao MH, Zou LL, Wu R et al. Transperineal ultrasound-guided 12-core prostate biopsy: an extended approach to diagnose transition zone prostate tumors. PLoS One 2014; 9; e89171.
Burrell RA, Swanton C. Tumour heterogeneity and the evolution of polyclonal drug resistance. Mol. Oncol. 2014; 8; 1095-1111.