Novel Therapy for Pediatric Angiosarcoma With Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

The management of pediatric abdominopelvic angiosarcoma remains unclear due to limited clinical experience. Herein, we presented the first 2 pediatric patients with abdominal angiosarcoma who were treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after neoadjuvant therapy. The first patient is alive with recurrent disease at 1-year follow-up and the second patient remains disease free after 1 year. CRS and HIPEC should be considered as a therapeutic option in the management of pediatric abdominal angiosarcomas. A multi-institutional international shared registry is needed to further evaluate the role of CRS and HIPEC in inducing remission of abdominopelvic angiosarcomas in the pediatric population.

The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies evaluation of HIPEC with Mitomycin C versus Oxaliplatin in 539 patients with colon cancer undergoing a complete cytoreductive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are gaining acceptance as treatment for selected patients with colorectal cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis (CRCPC). Tremendous variations exist in the HIPEC delivery. METHODS: The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (ASPSM) examined the overall survival in patients with CRCPC who underwent a complete cytoreduction and HIPEC with Oxaliplatin vs. Mitomycin C (MMC), stratifying them by the Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS). RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) of 539 patients with complete cytoreduction was 32.6 months, 32.7 months for the MMC group and 31.4 months for the Oxaliplatin group (P = 0.925). However, when stratified by PSDSS, median OS rates in PSDSS I/II patients were 54.3 months in those receiving MMC vs. 28.2 months in those receiving oxaliplatin (P = 0.012), whereas in PSDSS III/IV patients, median OS rates were 19.4 months in those receiving MMC vs. 30.4 months in those receiving Oxaliplatin (P = 0.427). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that MMC might be a better agent for HIPEC delivery than Oxaliplatin in patients with CRCPC, favorable histologies and low burden of disease (PSDSS I/II) undergoing complete cytoreduction. Prospective studies are warranted, which stratify patients by their PSDSS and randomize them to HIPEC with MMC vs. Oxaliplatin.

The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (ASPSM) Multiinstitution Evaluation of the Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS) in 1,013 Patients with Colorectal Cancer with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.

BACKGROUND: Extensive clinical experience suggests that hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may play an important role in the management of colorectal cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (CRCPC). However, there remains no established nonsurgical process to rationally select patients for this management, either for inclusion/stratification in clinical trials or as a component of standard of care. The Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS) was introduced as a basis to improve patient selection. METHODS: The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies conducted a retrospective review of 1,013 CRCPC patients. The PSDSS was evaluated on 3 specific criteria obtained before surgery (symptoms, extent of peritoneal dissemination, and primary tumor histology). Overall survival was analyzed according to four tiers of disease severity, and a comparison was made between patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery + HIPEC and those who did not. RESULTS: The PSDSS was calculated on 884 patients (87 %). The median survival of 275 patients not undergoing CRS/HIPEC based on their PSDSS-I (n = 8), II (n = 80), III (n = 55), and IV (n = 132)-was 45, 19, 8, and 6 months, respectively. The median survival of 609 patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC based on their PSDSS-I (n = 75), II (n = 317), III (n = 82), and IV (n = 135)-was 86, 43, 29, and 28 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data support that the PSDSS, undertaken before surgery, is capable of defining CRCPC populations who have a statistically defined high or considerably lower likelihood of long-term survival after CRS/HIPEC. The PSDSS can be quite useful in the decision to enter CRCPC patients into, and their stratification within, clinical trials.

Toxicities associated with hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion and isolated limb infusion in the treatment of melanoma and sarcoma.

Hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion (HILP) and isolated limb infusion (ILI) may play a significant role in the treatment of patients with recurrent or in transit extremity melanoma or sarcoma that is unresectable. These procedures may be indicated when patients are otherwise faced with the possibility of a debilitating amputation. Not entirely benign treatment modalities, HILP and ILI can be associated with regional and systemic toxicities. We conducted a literature search of published studies using HILP and ILI for the treatment of extremity sarcomas and melanomas, and associated toxicities was performed. The regional toxicities of HILP and ILI are similar. The most common toxicities reported are mild to moderate. However, when severe regional toxicity occurs, albeit infrequently (<5%), fasciotomies or even amputation may be necessary. Some studies have showed a relationship between acute regional toxicities and long term regional morbidity. Systemic toxicity appears to be more frequent when TNF-alpha is used in combination with other drugs during HILP, however the use of TNF-alpha in the United States is limited to trials. Although regional toxicities are similar, systemic toxicity of ILI is minimal compared to HILP. ILI is easier to repeat, technically less complex, and may be more acceptable in infirmed patients. Long term morbidity and outcomes for ILI are still being evaluated. Both of these techniques may be suitable options in patients with unresectable advanced or recurrent, or in transit extremity melanoma or sarcoma.