Impact of Combination Chemotherapy in Peritoneal Mesothelioma Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): The RENAPE Study.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improved the prognosis of selected patients with peritoneal mesothelioma (PM). OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate whether different HIPEC agents were associated with different outcomes in patients with PM. METHODS: From the RENAPE database, we selected all patients with histology-proven PM who underwent CRS + HIPEC from 1989 to 2014. Inclusion criteria were age ≤ 80 years, performance status ≤ 2, and no extraperitoneal metastases. RESULTS: Overall, 249 patients underwent CRS + HIPEC for PM. The HIPEC regimen included five chemotherapeutic agents (CAs), consisting of cisplatin, doxorubicin, mitomycin-C, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan. When considering all CAs (alone or in combination), there was no significant statistical difference in regard to postoperative overall survival (OS). However, OS was better when using two CAs (group 2 drugs) versus one CA (group 1 drug) (p = 0.03). The different CA regimens were equally distributed between the two groups. This association between OS and HIPEC agent, as well as a trend for better progression-free survival, were both observed in the two-drug group versus the one-drug group (p = 0.009) for patients undergoing complete cytoreductive surgery (CC-0) with an epithelioid subtype. CONCLUSIONS: This large study seems to show improved OS when combined CAs, especially with platinum-based regimens, are used for HIPEC in patients with PM, but needs to be confirmed by a randomized controlled trial.

Detection of colorectal tumors with water enema-multidetector row computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively determine the diagnostic capabilities of water enema-multidetector row computed tomography (WE-MDCT) in the detection of colorectal tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and one patients (55 male, 46 female) who had WE-MDCT and videocolonoscopy because of suspected colorectal tumors were included. Results of complete videocolonoscopy, surgery, and histopathologic analysis were used as standard of reference. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of WE-MDCT for the diagnosis of colorectal tumors were estimated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Ninety-two colorectal tumors (64 malignant, 28 benign) were confirmed in 71 patients (prevalence, 71/101; 70%). Overall sensitivity for colorectal tumor detection was 87% (80/92; 95%CI: 78%-93%) on a per lesion basis. For malignant and benign tumor detection, sensitivity was 100% (64/64; 95%CI: 94%-100%) and 57% (16/28; 95%CI: 37%-76%), respectively. For colorectal tumors ≥10 mm, sensitivity was 99% (76/77; 95%CI: 93%-100%). Seventy-nine of the 83 colorectal tumors ≥6 mm were detected, yielding a sensitivity of 95% (79/83; 95%CI: 88%-99%) for this specific size category. On a per patient basis, WE-MDCT had a sensitivity of 100% (71/71; 95%CI: 94%-100%), a specificity of 100% (30/30; 95%CI: 88%-100%), an accuracy of 100% (101/101; 95%CI: 96%-100%), a positive predictive value of 100% (71/71; 95%CI: 94%-100%), and a negative predictive value of 100% (30/30; 95%CI: 86%-100%) for the diagnosis of colorectal tumor. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that WE-MDCT is a promising imaging technique for the detection of malignant colorectal tumors. However, our results should be validated by larger and prospective studies.