Preoperative CA 19-9 Predicts Disease Progression in Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: An Analysis from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRPM) are increasingly treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC). Unfortunately, data identifying preoperative risk factors for poor oncologic outcomes after this procedure are limited. We aimed to determine the prognostic value of preoperative CEA, CA 125, and CA 19-9 on disease progression after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: Patients with CRPM treated with curative intent CRS/HIPEC from 12 participating sites in the United States from 2000 to 2017 were identified. Progression-free survival (PFS), defined as disease progression or recurrence, was the primary outcome. RESULTS: In 279 patients who met inclusion criteria, the rate of disease progression was 63.8%, with a median PFS of 11 months (interquartile range [IQR] 5-20). Elevated CA 19-9 was associated with dismal PFS at 2 years (8.9% elevated vs. 30% not elevated, p < 0.01). In 113 patients who underwent upfront CRS/HIPEC, CA 19-9 emerged as the sole tumor marker independently predictive of worse PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.88, p = 0.048). In the subgroup of patients who had received neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), no variable was independently predictive of PFS. CA 19-9 levels over 37 U/ml were highly specific for accelerated disease progression after CRS/HIPEC. Lastly, there was no association between PFS and elevated CEA or CA 125. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated CA 19-9 is associated with decreased PFS in patients with CRPM. While traditionally CEA is the main tumor marker assessed in colon cancer, we found that CA 19-9 may better inform preoperative risk stratification for poor oncologic outcomes in patients with CRPM. However, prospective studies are required to confirm this association.

Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Disadvantage Predicts Outcomes in Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) improves survival in select patients with peritoneal metastases (PM), but the impact of social determinants of health on CRS/HIPEC outcomes remains unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of a multi-institutional database of patients with PM who underwent CRS/HIPEC in the USA between 2000 and 2017. The area deprivation index (ADI) was linked to the patient's residential address. Patients were categorized as living in low (1-49) or high (50-100) ADI residences, with increasing scores indicating higher socioeconomic disadvantage. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, hospital/intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Among 1675 patients 1061 (63.3%) resided in low ADI areas and 614 (36.7%) high ADI areas. Appendiceal tumors (n = 1102, 65.8%) and colon cancer (n = 322, 19.2%) were the most common histologies. On multivariate analysis, high ADI was not associated with increased perioperative complications, hospital/ICU LOS, or DFS. High ADI was associated with worse OS (median not reached versus 49 months; 5 year OS 61.0% versus 28.2%, P < 0.0001). On multivariate Cox-regression analysis, high ADI (HR, 2.26; 95% CI 1.13-4.50; P < 0.001), cancer recurrence (HR, 2.26; 95% CI 1.61-3.20; P < 0.0001), increases in peritoneal carcinomatosis index (HR, 1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.05; P < 0.001), and incomplete cytoreduction (HR, 4.48; 95% CI 3.01-6.53; P < 0.0001) were associated with worse OS. CONCLUSIONS: Even after controlling for cancer-specific variables, adverse outcomes persisted in association with neighborhood-level socioeconomic disadvantage. The individual and structural-level factors leading to these cancer disparities warrant further investigation to improve outcomes for all patients with peritoneal malignancies.

Validation of the AJCC 8th Edition Staging System for Disseminated Appendiceal Cancer Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Multi-institutional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The AJCC 8th edition stratifies stage IV disseminated appendiceal cancer (dAC) patients based on grade and pathology. This study was designed to externally validate the staging system and to identify predictors of long-term survival. METHODS: A 12-institution cohort of dAC patients treated with CRS ± HIPEC was retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analyzed by using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate cox-regression was performed to assess factors associated with OS and RFS. RESULTS: Among 1009 patients, 708 had stage IVA and 301 had stage IVB disease. Median OS (120.4 mo vs. 47.2 mo) and RFS (79.3 mo vs. 19.8 mo) was significantly higher in stage IVA compared with IVB patients (p < 0.0001). RFS was greater among IVA-M1a (acellular mucin only) than IV M1b/G1 (well-differentiated cellular dissemination) patients (NR vs. 64 mo, p = 0.0004). Survival significantly differed between mucinous and nonmucinous tumors (OS 106.1 mo vs. 41.0 mo; RFS 46.7 mo vs. 21.2 mo, p < 0.05), and OS differed between well, moderate, and poorly differentiated (120.4 mo vs. 56.3 mo vs. 32.9 mo, p < 0.05). Both stage and grade were independent predictors of OS and RFS on multivariate analysis. Acellular mucin and mucinous histology were associated with better OS and RFS on univariate analysis only. CONCLUSIONS: AJCC 8th edition performed well in predicting outcomes in this large cohort of dAC patients treated with CRS ± HIPEC. Separation of stage IVA patients based on the presence of acellular mucin improved prognostication, which may inform treatment and long-term, follow-up strategies.

Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review.

Importance: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Recent advances in systemic and locoregional therapies have led to changes in many guidelines regarding systemic therapy, as well as the possibility to downstage patients to undergo resection. This review examines the advances in surgical and medical therapies relative to multidisciplinary treatment strategies for HCC. Observations: HCC is a major health problem worldwide. The obesity epidemic has made nonalcoholic fatty liver disease a major risk factor for the development of HCC. Multiple societies, such as the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, the European Association for the Study of the Liver, the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, provide guidelines for screening at-risk patients, as well as define staging systems to guide optimal treatment strategies. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system is widely accepted and has recently undergone updates with the introduction of new systemic therapies and stage migration. Conclusions and Relevance: The treatment of patients with HCC should involve a multidisciplinary approach with collaboration among surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and interventional radiologists to provide optimal care. Treatment paradigms must consider both tumor and patient-related factors such as extent of liver disease, which is a main driver of morbidity and mortality. The advent of more effective systemic and locoregional therapies has prolonged survival among patients with advanced disease and allowed some patients to undergo surgical intervention who would otherwise have disease considered unresectable.

Influence of insurance status on the postoperative outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is increasingly performed for peritoneal surface malignancies but remains associated with significant morbidity. Scant research is available regarding the impact of insurance status on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC between 2000 and 2017 at 12 participating sites in the US HIPEC Collaborative were identified. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the baseline characteristics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes of patients with government, private, or no insurance. RESULTS: Among 2268 patients, 699 (30.8%) had government insurance, 1453 (64.0%) had private, and 116 (5.1%) were uninsured. Patients with government insurance were older, more likely to be non-white, and comorbid (p < 0.05). Patients with government (OR: 2.25, CI: 1.50-3.36, p < 0.001) and private (OR: 1.69, CI: 1.15-2.49, p = 0.008) insurance had an increased risk of complications on univariate analysis. There was no independent relationship on multivariate analysis. An American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or 4, peritoneal carcinomatosis index score >15, completeness of cytoreduction score >1, and nonhome discharge were factors independently associated with a postoperative complication. CONCLUSION: While there were differences in postoperative outcomes between the three insurance groups on univariate analysis, there was no independent association between insurance status and postoperative complications after CRS/HIPEC.

Conditional Survival Following Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Surface Malignancies: An Analysis from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: The long-term prognosis of patients who undergo cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) varies considerably on the basis of histological and operative factors. While overall survival (OS) estimates are used to inform adjuvant therapy and surveillance strategies, conditional survival may provide more clinically relevant estimates of prognosis by accounting for disease-free time elapsed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients from 12 academic institutions who underwent CRS ± HIPEC for PSM from 2000 to 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. OS and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method while conditional overall (COS) and conditional disease-free survival (CDFS) rates were calculated at 1, 2, or 3 years from surgery for different tumor histologies. RESULTS: Overall, 1610 patients underwent CRS ± HIPEC. Among patients with benign appendiceal mucinous tumors (N = 460), 5-year OS and COS at 3 years were 92.1% and 96.3% (Δ4.2%), respectively. For patients with well-differentiated appendiceal cancers (N = 400), 5-year OS and COS at 3 years were 76.3% and 88.3% (Δ12.0%), respectively. For patients with high-grade appendiceal cancers (N = 258), 5-year OS and COS at 3 years were 43.8% and 75.4% (Δ31.6%), respectively. For patients with colorectal cancers (N = 362), 5-year OS and COS at 3 years were 31.8% and 67.3% (Δ35.5%), respectively. For patients with peritoneal mesothelioma (N = 130), 5-year OS and COS at 3 years were 67.6% and 89.7% (Δ22.1%), respectively. Similar trends were observed for DFS/CDFS. CONCLUSION: The conditional survival of patients undergoing CRS ± HIPEC for PSM is associated with tumor histology. COS and CDFS provide a more accurate, dynamic estimate of survival than OS and DFS, especially for patients with more aggressive histologies.

Do Lymph Node Metastases Matter in Appendiceal Cancer with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis? A US HIPEC Collaborative Study.

BACKGROUND: Whether formal regional lymph node (LN) evaluation is necessary for patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma (AA) who have peritoneal metastases is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of LN metastases on survival in patients treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the US HIPEC collaborative, a multi-institutional consortium comprising 12 high-volume centers, was performed to identify patients with AA who underwent CRS-HIPEC with adequate LN sampling (≥ 12 LNs). RESULTS: Two hundred-fifty patients with AA who underwent CRS-HIPEC were included. Outcomes were compared between LN - and LN + disease. Baseline patient characteristics between groups were similar, with most patients undergoing complete cytoreduction (0/1: 86.0% vs. 76.8%, p = 0.08), respectively. More adverse tumor factors were found in patients with LN + disease, including poor differentiation, signet ring cells, and lymphovascular invasion. Multivariate analysis of overall survival (OS) found LN + disease was independently associated with worse OS (HR: 2.82 95%CI: 1.25-6.34, p = 0.01), even after correction for receipt of systemic therapy. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, median OS was lower in patients with LN + disease (25.9 months vs. 91.4 months, p < 0.01). LN + disease remained associated with poor OS following propensity score matching (HR: 4.98 95%CI: 1.72-14.40, p < 0.01) and in patients with PCI ≥ 20 (HR: 3.68 95%CI: 1.54-8.80, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this large multi-institutional study of patients with AA undergoing CRS-HIPEC, LN status remained associated with worse OS even in the setting of advanced peritoneal carcinomatosis. Formal LN evaluation should be performed for most patients with AA undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Is Cytoreductive Surgery-Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Still Indicated in Patients With Extraperitoneal Disease?

INTRODUCTION: The role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with extraperitoneal disease (EPD) is controversial. METHODS: Among patients with peritoneal metastases from appendiceal cancer (AC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) who underwent CRS-HIPEC, those with EPD (liver, lung, or retroperitoneal lymph nodes [RP LN]) were retrospectively compared to those without EPD. Overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) analyses were performed before/after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: Among 1341 patients with AC (64%) or CRC (36%) who underwent CRS ± HIPEC, 134 (10%) had EPD whereas 1207 (90%) did not. EPD was located in the lungs (47%), RP LN (28%), liver (18%), or multiple (6%). Patients with EPD experienced worse median OS (34 versus 63 mo; P = 0.002) and RFS (12 versus 19 mo; P < 0.001). On a multivariable analysis, EPD was associated with worse RFS (P = 0.003), but not OS (P = 0.071). After PSM, the association of EPD with OS (P = 0.204) and RFS (P = 0.056) was no longer significant. In the multivariable analysis of the PSM cohort, EPD was not associated with OS (P = 0.157) or RFS (P = 0.110). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this large retrospective multi-institutional study suggest that EPD alone, while a negative prognostic indicator, should not be considered an absolute contraindication to CRS ± HIPEC for otherwise well-selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. Further research is needed to delineate whether location of EPD influences OS and RFS following CRS-HIPEC.

Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Tumor Markers in Pseudomyxoma Peritonei from Low-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasm: a Study from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Tumor markers are commonly utilized in the diagnostic evaluation, treatment decision making, and surveillance of appendiceal tumors. In this study, we aimed to determine the prognostic significance of elevated preoperative tumor markers in patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei secondary to low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm who underwent cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. METHODS: Using a multi-institutional database, eligible patients with measured preoperative tumor markers [carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), or cancer antigen 125 (CA-125)] were identified. Univariate and multivariate Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis assessed relationships between normal and elevated serum tumor markers with progression-free and overall survival in the context of multiple clinicopathologic variables. RESULTS: zTwo hundred and sixty-four patients met criteria. CEA was the most commonly measured tumor marker (97%). Patients who had any elevated tumor marker had a higher peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) as compared to those with normal range markers. Elevated CEA and CA 19-9 levels were individually associated with longer inpatient length of stay, requirement for intraoperative transfusion, and incomplete cytoreduction. Utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, increased PCI score, elevated CA 19-9 (p = 0.007), and CA-125 levels (p = 0.01) were predictive of decreased progression-free survival on univariate analysis. However, in a multivariate model, only elevated PCI was a statistically significant predictor of progression-free survival. CONCLUSION: Elevated preoperative tumor markers indicate a higher burden of disease but are not independently associated with survival in this retrospective multi-institutional cohort. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the utility of these markers in this patient population.

The Utility of Preoperative Tumor Markers in Peritoneal Carcinomatosis from Primary Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: an Analysis from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Prognostication based on preoperative clinical factors is lacking in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC). This study aims to determine the value of preoperative tumor markers as predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from a primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the appendix (MACA). METHODS: We queried the United States HIPEC Collaborative, a database of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated with CRS/HIPEC at twelve institutions between 2000 and 2017, identifying 409 patients with MACA. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent predictors of disease progression. Subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of tumor grade on the predictive value of tumor markers. RESULTS: CA19-9 [HR 2.44, CI 1.2-3.4] emerged as an independent predictor of PFS while CEA [HR 4.98, CI 1.06-23.46] was independently predictive of OS (p <0.01). Tumor differentiation was the most potent predictor of both PFS (poorly differentiated vs well, [HR 4.5 CI 2.01-9.94]) and OS ([poorly differentiated vs well-differentiated: [HR 13.5, CI 3.16-57.78]), p <0.05. Among patients with combined CA19-9 elevation and poorly differentiated histology, 86% recurred within a year of CRS/HIPEC (p < 0.01). Similarly, the coexistence of CEA elevation and unfavorable histology led to the lowest survival rate at two years [36%, p < 0.01]. CA-125 was not predictive of PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: Elevated preoperative CA19-9 portends worse PFS, while elevated CEA predicts worse OS after CRS/HIPEC in patients with MACA. This study provides additional evidence that CA19-9 and CEA levels should be collected during standard preoperative bloodwork, while CA-125 can likely be omitted. Tumor differentiation, when added to preoperative tumor marker levels, provides powerful prognostic information. Prospective studies are required to confirm this association.

Impact of Perioperative Blood Transfusions on Outcomes After Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a major operation frequently necessitating red blood cell transfusion. Using multi-institutional data from the U.S. HIPEC Collaborative, this study sought to determine the association of perioperative allogenic blood transfusion (PABT) with perioperative outcomes after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancy between 2000 and 2017. Propensity score-matching was performed to mitigate bias. Univariate analysis was used to compare demographic, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables. Factors independently associated with PABT were identified using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The inclusion criteria were met by 1717 patients, 510 (29.7%) of whom required PABT. The mean Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) of our cohort was 14.8 ± 9.3. Propensity score-matching showed an independent association between PABT and postoperative risk of pleural effusion, hemorrhage, pulmonary embolism, enteric fistula formation, Clavien-Dindo grades 3 and 4 morbidity, longer hospital stay, and reoperation (all P < 0.05 in the multivariate analysis). Compared with the patients who received 1 to 5 red blood cell (RBC) units, the patients who received more than 5 units had a greater risk of renal impairment, a longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and more postoperative infections. Finally, PABT was an independent predictor of worse survival for patients with appendiceal and colorectal primaries. CONCLUSION: Even low levels of PABT for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC are independently associated with a greater risk of infectious and non-infectious postoperative complications, and this risk is increased for patients receiving more than 5 RBC units. Worse survival was independently predicted by PABT for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of an appendiceal or colorectal origin.

A novel preoperative risk score to optimize patient selection for performing concomitant liver resection with cytoreductive surgery/HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: While parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: Patients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000-2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0-1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p = .001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p < .001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p = .007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p = .014) than non-LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2-year OS 62% vs. 79%, p < .001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10-11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69-12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21-9.85) (all p < .05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2-year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%). CONCLUSIONS: As CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.

The Role of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Non-colorectal Peritoneal Surface Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis, from a variety of gastrointestinal and gynecological malignancies, has been historically challenging to treat and there remains a wide range of biologic aggressiveness in these patients. Malignancies commonly associated with PC include those of colorectal, appendiceal, gastric, ovarian, sarcoma, small intestinal, and primary peritoneal origin among others. Advances in our understanding of this unique disease process have led to significant interest in cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) as an emerging treatment option. The goal of CRS-HIPEC is to remove all visible macroscopic disease while preserving organ function, and then treat microscopic disease through perfusion of the peritoneal cavity with heated chemotherapy. PURPOSE: Although recent reviews have focused on the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis secondary to colorectal cancer given the publication of several recent randomized controlled trials, the purpose of the current review is to summarize the evidence on CRS-HIPEC for non-colorectal peritoneal surface malignancies, including appendiceal neoplasms, malignant peritoneal mesothelioma, gastric cancer, and ovarian cancer. RESULTS: While retrospective studies have clarified the importance of prognostic factors such as the peritoneal carcinomatosis index, completeness of cytoreduction, histopathological characteristics, and lymph node positivity, the lack of convincing level 1 evidence for the use of CRS-HIPEC has led to it remaining a highly controversial topic. CONCLUSION: The decision to utilize CRS-HIPEC should involve a multidisciplinary team approach and evaluation of prognostic factors to balance the short-term morbidity of the operation with maximum long-term benefits. Large, multi-institutional groups and ongoing trials hold promise for clarifying the role of CRS-HIPEC in peritoneal surface malignancies.

The impact of HIPEC vs. EPIC for the treatment of mucinous appendiceal carcinoma: a study from the US HIPEC collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: Mucinous appendiceal carcinoma is a rare malignancy that commonly spreads to the peritoneum leading to peritoneal metastases. Complete cytoreduction with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (PIC) is the mainstay of treatment, administered as either hyperthermic intra peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) or early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC). Our goal was to assess the perioperative and long term survival outcomes associated with these two PIC methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with mucinous appendiceal carcinoma were identified in the US HIPEC Collaborative database from 12 academic institutions. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and survival outcomes were compared among patients who underwent HIPEC vs. EPIC with inverse probability weighting (IPW) used for adjustment. RESULTS: Among 921 patients with mucinous appendiceal carcinoma, 9% underwent EPIC while 91% underwent HIPEC. There was no difference in Grade III-V complications between the two groups (18.5% for HIPEC vs. 15.0% for EPIC, p=.43) though patients who underwent HIPEC had higher rates of readmissions (21.2% vs. 8.8%, p<.01). Additionally, PIC method was not an independent predictor for overall survival (OS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS) after adjustment on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with mucinous appendiceal carcinoma, both EPIC and HIPEC appear to be associated with similar perioperative and long-term outcomes.

Neoadjuvant-modified FOLFIRINOX vs nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients who achieved surgical resection.

We conducted an institutional study to compare the clinical and pathological efficacy between the neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)-modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLF) vs nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients who completed resection. The study retrospectively enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed BRPC or LAPC from 2010 to 2018 at our institution. The survival rates were determined by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test was used to test differences. Cox's proportional hazard model was used to assess survival with respect to covariates. Seventy-two patients who completed at least two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection were included, with 52 (72.2%) patients receiving mFOLF and 20 (27.8%) receiving nab-P/G. Patients treated with mFOLF had statistically higher rates of RECIST 1.1 partial or complete response (16/52 vs 1/20, P = .028). Additionally, mFOLF patients had greater pathological tumor size reduction, fewer positive lymph nodes, and higher treatment response grade compared to the nab-P/G patients (all P < .05). The median overall survival was 33.3 months vs 27.1 months (P = .105), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) was 21.3 months vs 14.6 months (P = .042) in the mFOLF vs nab-P/G groups, respectively. On multivariate analysis, mFOLF (hazard ratio, 0.428; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.186-0.987) and abnormal postoperative CA 19-9 (hazard ratio, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.06-5.76) were associated with DMFS. Among patients with BRPC and LAPC who complete surgical resection, neoadjuvant mFOLF was associated with improved pathological and clinical outcomes compared with nab-P/G.

Outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy before CRS-HIPEC for patients with appendiceal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is indicated for patients with peritoneal dissemination of appendiceal cancer. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) before CRS-HIPEC remains controversial. METHODS: A retrospective review of adult patients who underwent CRS ± HIPEC for metastatic appendiceal cancer between 2000-2017 was performed. Patients who received NAC followed by surgery were compared with those who underwent surgery first (SF) with and without 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: Among 803 patients with appendiceal cancer who underwent CRS ± HIPEC, 225 (28%) received NAC, and 578 (72%) underwent SF. After PSM (n = 186), median overall survival (OS) did not differ (NAC: 40 vs SF: 56 months; P = .210) but recurrence-free survival (RFS) was worse among patients who received NAC (14 vs 22 months; P = .007). NAC was independently associated with worse OS (hazards ratio [HR], 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-3.18) and RFS (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.25-2.99). CONCLUSION: In this multi-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with peritoneal dissemination from appendiceal cancer, the use of NAC before CRS-HIPEC was associated with worse OS and RFS even after PSM and multivariable regression. Immediate surgery should be considered for patients with disease amenable to complete cytoreduction.

Trends in the indications for and short-term outcomes of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an increasingly utilized strategy for patients with peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM). METHODS: The US HIPEC Collaborative was retrospectively reviewed to compare the indications and perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent CRS ±â€¯HIPEC between 2000 and 2012 (P1) versus 2013-2017 (P2). RESULTS: Among 2,364 patients, 39% were from P1 and 61% from P2. The most common primary site was appendiceal (64%) while the median PCI was 13 and most patients had CCR 0 (60%) or 1 (25%). Over time, median estimated blood loss, need for transfusion, and length of hospital stay decreased. While the incidence of any (55% vs. 57%; p = 0.426) and Clavien III/IV complications did not change over time, there was a decrease in 90-day mortality (5% vs. 3%; p = 0.045). CONCLUSION: CRS-HIPEC is increasingly performed for PSM at high-volume centers. Despite improvements in some perioperative outcomes and a reduction in postoperative mortality, morbidity rates remain high.

Optimal Surveillance Frequency After CRS/HIPEC for Appendiceal and Colorectal Neoplasms: A Multi-institutional Analysis of the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: No guidelines exist for surveillance following cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for appendiceal and colorectal cancer. The primary objective was to define the optimal surveillance frequency after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: The U.S. HIPEC Collaborative database (2000-2017) was reviewed for patients who underwent a CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer. Radiologic surveillance frequency was divided into two categories: low-frequency surveillance (LFS) at q6-12mos or high-frequency surveillance (HFS) at q2-4mos. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 975 patients, the median age was 55 year, 41% were male: 31% had non-invasive appendiceal (n = 301), 45% invasive appendiceal (n = 435), and 24% colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 239). With a median follow-up time of 25 mos, the median time to recurrence was 12 mos. Despite less surveillance, LFS patients had no decrease in median OS (non-invasive appendiceal: 106 vs. 65 mos, p < 0.01; invasive appendiceal: 120 vs. 73 mos, p = 0.02; colorectal cancer [CRC]: 35 vs. 30 mos, p = 0.8). LFS patients had lower median PCI scores compared with HFS (non-invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 19; invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 14; CRC: 8 vs. 11; all p < 0.01). However, on multivariable analysis, accounting for PCI score, LFS was still not associated with decreased OS for any histologic type (non-invasive appendiceal: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, p = 0.1; invasive appendiceal: HR: 0.73, p = 0.42; CRC: HR: 1.14, p = 0.59). When estimating annual incident cases of CRS/HIPEC at 375 for non-invasive appendiceal, 375 invasive appendiceal and 4410 colorectal, LFS compared with HFS for the initial two post-operative years would potentially save $13-19 M/year to the U.S. healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: Low-frequency surveillance after CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer is not associated with decreased survival, and when considering decreased costs, may optimize resource utilization.