Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy improves the survival of gastric cancer patients with ovarian metastasis and peritoneal dissemination.

The prognosis for ovarian metastasis of gastric cancer is poor. There is no currently available treatment for this disease. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in female gastric cancer patients with metachronous ovarian metastasis. From January 2000 to December 2010, 62 patients developed ovarian metastasis after undergoing gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. Thirty-two patients underwent CRS plus HIPEC, and 30 patients underwent CRS alone. The median age of all 62 patients was 44 years (range 19-71 years). Metastatic carcinoma involving bilateral ovaries was observed in 50 patients (80.6 %). The median survival time in the CRS + HIPEC group was 15.5 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] 12.1-18.9 months) but was only 10.4 months (95 % CI 8.5-12.2 months) in the CRS group (P = 0.018). Among the 32 patients with pelvic peritoneal metastasis, a stratified analysis revealed that the median survival period for the 15 patients treated with CRS + HIPEC was significantly higher than that for the patients treated with CRS alone (P = 0.046). Among the 30 patients who suffered from ovarian metastasis alone, the median survival times were similar in both groups (P = 0.141). A multivariate analysis revealed that CRS + HIPEC and a low Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) were independent predictors for improved survival. In conclusion, our study indicates that employing the HIPEC procedure after CRS could improve the survival time of patients with ovarian metastasis with few complications; however, we do not recommend HIPEC treatment for ovarian metastasis alone.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX: improved outcomes in Chinese patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although the role of peri-operative chemotherapy is established in the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer, the optimal regime remains to be determined. FOLFOX has been used in palliative setting with good response rates but its role in a neoadjuvant setting is not well established. METHODS: This is a prospective non-randomized study comparing peri-operative FOLFOX versus adjuvant FOLFOX in patients with resectable locally advanced gastric cancer. Response to chemotherapy was assessed according to WHO criteria and pathological changes. Kaplan-Meier log rank test was used to calculate and compare survival differences. RESULTS: There were 73 patients (neoadjuvant = 36). Complete and partial response was observed in 2 (6%) and 21 (64%) patients, respectively. Four-year overall survival (OS) in the neoadjuvant arm was 78% versus 51% in the adjuvant arm (P = 0.031). Subgroup analysis found R0 resection (86% vs. 55%, P = 0.011) and patients with proximal cancers (87% vs. 14%, P < 0.001) to have improved OS. The most common side effect was grade 1-2 leukopenia. There were no grade 3 neuropathies, grade 4 cytopaenias, or treatment related deaths. CONCLUSION: Peri-operative treatment with FOLFOX shows promise in patients with resectable locally advanced gastric cancer. It warrants further evaluation and should be considered an alternative to peri-operative ECF.