Phase I study of intraperitoneal irinotecan combined with palliative systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases.

BACKGROUND: Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) owing to extensive peritoneal disease have a poor prognosis. It was hypothesized that these patients may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal irinotecan to standard palliative systemic chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a classical 3 + 3 phase I dose-escalation trial in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who were not eligible for CRS-HIPEC. Intraperitoneal irinotecan was administered every 2 weeks, concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin)-bevacizumab. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary objectives were to elucidate the systemic and intraperitoneal pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and efficacy. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with 50 mg (4 patients) and 75 mg (9 patients) intraperitoneal irinotecan. Two dose-limiting toxicities occurred with 100 mg irinotecan among five patients. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was established to be 75 mg, and it was well tolerated. Intraperitoneal exposure to SN-38 (active metabolite of irinotecan) was high compared with systemic exposure (median intraperitoneal area under the curve (AUC) to systemic AUC ratio 4.6). Thirteen patients had a partial radiological response and five had stable disease. Four patients showed a complete response during post-treatment diagnostic laparoscopy. Five patients underwent salvage resection or CRS-HIPEC. Median overall survival was 23.9 months. CONCLUSION: Administration of 75 mg intraperitoneal irinotecan concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX-bevacizumab was safe and well tolerated. Intraperitoneal SN-38 exposure was high and prolonged. As oncological outcomes were promising, intraperitoneal administration of irinotecan may be a good alternative to other, more invasive and costly treatment options. A phase II study is currently accruing.

Patients with extensive colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy have poor survival. The authors tried to improve the survival of these patients by adding intraperitoneal (inside the abdominal cavity) chemotherapy to standard palliative chemotherapy which is administered into the bloodstream. In this trial, irinotecan (a type of chemotherapy) was administered into the abdomen of patients with extensive colorectal peritoneal metastases. The authors investigated which dose could be administered safely in combination with standard palliative chemotherapy. They also looked into toxicity, safety, benefit, and movement of the drug in the body. Eighteen patients were treated in this study. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was 75 mg. It was well tolerated and could be administered safely. The intra-abdominal amount of irinotecan was high, whereas the amount of irinotecan in the blood remained low. The benefits of intra-abdominal irinotecan were promising. Because of this, a new study has been started to further investigate this new combination chemotherapy for colorectal cancer.

Perioperative Systemic Therapy vs Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Predictive Ability of C-Reactive Protein in Detecting Short-Term Complications After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a potentially curative treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of postoperative inflammatory biomarkers in assessing complications after CRS and HIPEC. METHODS: A prospective database of 181 patients, who underwent CRS-HIPEC between March 2014 through April 2018 in the Erasmus MC, was retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative complications were defined according to the serious adverse event (SAE) grading system. Levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count were compared between patients with SAE grade < 3 and SAE grade ≥ 3. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for CRP and WBC against SAE ≥ 3 and various intra-abdominal complications. RESULTS: SAE ≥ 3 postoperative complications occurred in 50 patients. From the second until the fifth postoperative day (POD), CRP levels were significantly higher (p = 0.023, p < 0.001, p = 0.002, and p = 0.002, respectively) in these patients. CRP concentrations above 166 mg/L on POD3 (AUC 0.75) and 116 mg/L on POD4 (AUC 0.70) were associated with the highest risk of an SAE ≥ 3. Postoperative WBC levels were not significantly different between patients with SAE < 3 and SAE ≥ 3 complications. CONCLUSION: Data from our hospital suggest that CRP levels that continue to rise after POD2 or that are ≥ 166 mg/L at POD3 or ≥ 116 mg/L at POD4, indicate a considerable risk for developing high-grade SAEs. The cut-off values we found can potentially be used as a threshold for additional diagnostic interventions, after they have been validated in external data.

Adjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy vs Active Surveillance Following Up-front Resection of Isolated Synchronous Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.

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.

Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced colon cancer (COLOPEC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Nearly a quarter of patients with locally advanced (T4 stage) or perforated colon cancer are at risk of developing peritoneal metastases, often without curative treatment options. We aimed to determine the efficacy of adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with locally advanced colon cancer. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label trial was done in nine hospitals that specialised in HIPEC in the Netherlands. Patients with clinical or pathological T4N0-2M0-stage tumours or perforated colon cancer were randomly assigned (1:1), with a web-based randomisation application, before resection of the primary tumour, to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (experimental group) or to adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone (control group). Patients were stratified by tumour characteristic (T4 or perforation), age (<65 years or ≥65 years), and surgical approach of the primary tumour resection (laparoscopic or open). Key eligibility criteria included age between 18 and 75 years, adequate clinical condition for HIPEC, and intention to start adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Patients with metastatic disease were ineligible. Adjuvant HIPEC consisted of fluorouracil (400 mg/m2) and leucovorin (20 mg/m2) delivered intravenously followed by intraperitoneal delivery of oxaliplatin (460 mg/m2) for 30 min at 42°C, delivered simultaneously or within 5-8 weeks after primary tumour resection. In all patients without evidence of recurrent disease at 18 months, a diagnostic laparoscopy was done. The primary endpoint was peritoneal metastasis free-survival at 18 months, measured in the intention-to-treat population, with the Kaplan-Meier method. Adverse events were assessed in all patients who received assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02231086. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2015, and Feb 20, 2017, 204 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (102 in each group). In the HIPEC group, two patients withdrew consent after randomisation. In this group, 19 (19%) of 100 patients were diagnosed with peritoneal metastases: nine (47%) during surgical exploration preceding intentional adjuvant HIPEC, eight (42%) during routine follow-up, and two (11%) during diagnostic laparoscopy at 18-months. In the control group, 23 (23%) of 102 patients were diagnosed with peritoneal metastases, of whom seven (30%) were diagnosed by laparoscopy at 18-months and 16 during regular follow-up (therefore making them ineligible for diagnostic laparoscopy). In the intention-to-treat analysis (n=202), there was no difference in peritoneal-free survival at 18-months (80·9% [95% CI 73·3-88·5] for the experimental group vs 76·2% [68·0-84·4] for the control group, log-rank one-sided p=0·28). 12 (14%) of 87 patients who received adjuvant HIPEC developed postoperative complications and one (1%) encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis. INTERPRETATION: In patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer, treatment with adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin did not improve peritoneal metastasis-free survival at 18 months. Routine use of adjuvant HIPEC is not advocated on the basis of this trial. FUNDING: Organization for Health Research and Development and the Dutch Cancer Society.

Adjuvant dendritic cell based immunotherapy (DCBI) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for peritoneal mesothelioma, a phase II single centre open-label clinical trial: rationale and design of the MESOPEC trial.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is an uncommon but aggressive neoplasm and has a strong association with asbestos exposure. MPM has low survival rates of approximately 1 year even after (palliative) surgery and/or systemic chemotherapy. Recent advances in treatment strategies focusing on cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have resulted in improved median survival of 53 months and a 5 year survival of 47%. However, recurrence rates are high. Current systemic chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting is of limited efficacy, while immunotherapy with dendritic cell based immunotherapy (DCBI) has yielded promising results in murine models with peritoneal mesothelioma and in patients with pleural mesothelioma. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The MESOPEC trial is an open-label single centre phase II study. The study population are adult patients with histological/cytological confirmed diagnosis of epithelioid malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. INTERVENTION: 4 to 6 weeks before CRS-HIPEC a leukapheresis is performed of which the monocytes are used for differentiation to dendritic cells (DCs). Autologous DCs pulsed with allogeneic tumour associated antigens (MesoPher) are re-injected 8 to 10 weeks after surgery, three times biweekly. Additional booster vaccinations are given at 3 and 6 months.Primary objective is to determine the feasibility of administering DCBI after CRS-HIPEC in patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Secondary objectives are to assess safety of DCBI in patients with peritoneal mesothelioma and determine whether a specific immunological response against the tumour occurs as a result of this adjuvant immunotherapy. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Permission to carry out this study protocol has been granted by the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO in Dutch) and the Research Ethics Committee (METC in Dutch). The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7060. EudraCT: 2017-000897-12; Pre-Results.

Perioperative systemic therapy and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC versus upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study (CAIRO6)

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 .

Standard Clinical Protocol for Bidirectional Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): Systemic Leucovorin, 5-Fluorouracil, and Heated Intraperitoneal Oxaliplatin in a Chloride-Containing Carrier Solution.

BACKGROUND: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy has an established role in the treatment of selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases. Oxaliplatin is highly suitable as a chemotherapeutic agent for hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), but its use to date has been limited because of the morbidity caused by severe electrolyte and glycemic imbalances associated with 5% glucose as its carrier solution. This report provides an overview of the development, rationale, and application of intraperitoneal chemotherapy and the use of various drugs and carrier solutions. A novel, evidence-based protocol for bidirectional oxaliplatin-based HIPEC in a physiologic carrier solution (Dianeal PD4 dextrose 1.36%) is presented, and its impact on electrolyte and glucose levels is demonstrated. METHODS: After implementation of the new protocol, the serum electrolyte (sodium, potassium, and chloride) levels, glucose levels, and intravenous insulin requirements were intensively measured in eight consecutive cases immediately before HIPEC (T = 0), immediately after HIPEC (T = 30), 1 h after HIPEC (T = 60), and 3 h after HIPEC (T = 180). RESULTS: The median sodium levels were 140 mmol/L at T = 0, 138 mmol/L at T = 30, 140 mmol/L at T = 60, and 140 mmol/L at T = 180. The respective median potassium levels were 4.6, 4.2, 3.7, and 3.9 mmol/L, and the respective median chloride levels were 112, 111, 111, and 112 mmol/L. The respective median glucose levels were 9, 11.5, 10.7, and 8.6 mmol/L. The median insulin requirements were respectively 0.5, 1.5, 1.2, and 0 U/h. None of the patients were diabetic. CONCLUSION: Using a novel protocol for bidirectional oxaliplatin-based HIPEC in Dianeal instead of 5% glucose, the observed fluctuations in this study were minimal and not clinically relevant compared with historical values for electrolyte and glycemic changes using 5% glucose as a HIPEC carrier solution. This novel protocol leads to only minimal and clinically irrelevant electrolyte and glycemic disturbances, and its adoption as the standard protocol for oxaliplatin-based HIPEC should be considered.

Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. These clinical problems underline the need for effective adjuvant therapy in high-risk patients to minimize the risk of outgrowth of peritoneal micro metastases. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to be suitable for this purpose. Without the need for cytoreductive surgery, adjuvant HIPEC can be performed with a low complication rate and short hospital stay. METHODS/DESIGN: The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 °C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. DISCUSSION: Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Is restaging with chest and abdominal CT scan after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer necessary?

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence regarding restaging of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after a long course of neoadjuvant radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. This study evaluated the value of restaging with chest and abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scan after radiotherapy. METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2010, all newly diagnosed patients in our tertiary referral hospital, who underwent a long course of radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, were analyzed. Patients were only included if they had chest and abdominal imaging before and after radiotherapy treatment. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients who met the inclusion criteria and were treated with curative intent were included. A change in treatment strategy due to new findings on the CT scan after radiotherapy was observed in 18 (12%) of 153 patients. Twelve patients (8%) were spared rectal surgery due to progressive metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Restaging with a chest and abdominal CT scan after radiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer is advisable because additional findings may alter the treatment strategy.

Long-term results of tumor necrosis factor alpha- and melphalan-based isolated limb perfusion in locally advanced extremity soft tissue sarcomas.

PURPOSE: Because there is no survival benefit of amputation for extremity soft tissue sarcomas (STSs), limb-sparing surgery has become the gold standard. Tumor size reduction by induction therapy to render nonresectable tumors resectable or facilitate function-preserving surgery can be achieved by tumor necrosis factor α (TNF) -based and melphalan-based isolated limb perfusion (TM-ILP). This study reports the long-term results of 231 TM-ILPs for locally advanced extremity STS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 231 TM-ILPs in 208 consecutive patients (1991 to 2005), who were all candidates for functional or anatomic amputation for locally advanced extremity STS. All patients had a potential follow-up of up to 5 years. TM-ILP was performed under mild hyperthermic conditions with 1 to 4 mg of TNF and 10 to 13 mg/L of limb-volume melphalan. Almost all patients (85%) had intermediate- or high-grade tumors. RESULTS: The overall response rate (ORR) was 71% (complete response, 18%; partial response, 53%). Multifocal sarcomas had a significantly better ORR of 83% (P = .008). The local recurrence rate was 30% (n = 70); local recurrence rates were highest for multifocal tumors (54%; P = .001) and after previous radiotherapy (54%; P < .001). Five-year overall survival rate was 42%. Survival was poorest in patients with large tumors (P = .01) and with leiomyosarcomas (P < .001). Limb salvage rate was 81%. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that TM-ILP results in a limb salvage rate of 81% in patients with locally advanced extremity STS who would otherwise have undergone amputation. Whenever an amputation is deemed necessary to obtain local control of an extremity STS, TM-ILP should be considered.