Liver transplantation as an alternative for the treatment of neuroendocrine liver metastasis: Appraisal of the current evidence.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation (LT) for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) is still in debate. Studies comparing LT with liver resection (LR) for NELM are scarce, as patient selection is heterogeneous and experience is limited. The goal of this review was to provide a critical analysis of the evidence on LT versus LR in the treatment of NELM. DATA SOURCES: A scoping literature search on LT and LR for NELM was performed with PubMed, including English articles up to March 2023. RESULTS: International guidelines recommend LR for NELM in resectable, well-differentiated tumors in the absence of extrahepatic metastatic disease with superior results of LR compared to systemic or liver-directed therapies. Advanced liver surgery has extended resectability criteria whilst entailing increased perioperative risk and short disease-free survival. In highly selected patients (based on the Milan criteria) with unresectable NELM, oncologic results of LT are promising. Prognostic factors include tumor biology (G1/G2) and burden, waiting time for LT, patient age and extrahepatic spread. Based on low-level evidence, LT for low-grade NELM within the Milan criteria resulted in improved disease-free survival and overall survival compared to LR. The benefits of LT were lost in patients beyond the Milan NELM-criteria. CONCLUSIONS: With adherence to strict selection criteria especially tumor biology, LT for NELM is becoming a valuable option providing oncologic benefits compared to LR. Recent evidence suggests even stricter selection criteria with regard to tumor biology.

Transplantation for metastatic liver disease.

The liver is a common site of metastases from many cancers, particularly those originating in the gastrointestinal tract. Liver transplantation is an uncommonly used but promising and at times controversial treatment option for neuroendocrine and colorectal liver metastases. Transplantation with meticulous patient selection has been associated with excellent long-term outcomes in individuals with neuroendocrine liver metastases, but questions remain regarding the role of transplantation in those who could also be eligible for hepatectomy, the role of neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatments in minimising recurrence, and the optimal timing of the procedure. A prospective pilot study of liver transplantation for unresectable colorectal liver metastases that reported a 5-year overall survival rate of 60% reinvigorated interest in this area following initially dismal outcomes. This has been followed by larger studies, and prospective trials are ongoing to quantify the potential benefits of liver transplantation over palliative chemotherapy. This review provides a critical summary of currently available knowledge on liver transplantation for neuroendocrine and colorectal liver metastases, and highlights avenues for further study to address gaps in the evidence base.

Controversy Over Liver Transplantation or Resection for Neuroendocrine Liver Metastasis: Tumor Biology Cuts the Deal.

BACKGROUND: In patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM), liver transplantation (LT) is an alternative to liver resection (LR), although the choice of therapy remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we aim to provide novel insight in this dispute. METHODS: Following a systematic literature search, 15 large international centers were contacted to provide comprehensive data on their patients after LR or LT for NELM. Survival analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method, while multivariable Cox regression served to identify factors influencing survival after either transplantation or resection. Inverse probability weighting and propensity score matching was used for analyses with balanced and equalized baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 455 patients were analyzed, including 230 after LR and 225 after LT, with a median follow-up of 97 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 85-110 months]. Multivariable analysis revealed G3 grading as a negative prognostic factor for LR [hazard ratio (HR)=2.22, 95% CI: 1.04-4.77, P =0.040], while G2 grading (HR=2.52, 95% CI: 1.15-5.52, P =0.021) and LT outside Milan criteria (HR=2.40, 95% CI: 1.16-4.92, P =0.018) were negative prognostic factors in transplanted patients. Inverse probability-weighted multivariate analyses revealed a distinct survival benefit after LT. Matched patients presented a median overall survival (OS) of 197 months (95% CI: 143-not reached) and a 73% 5-year OS after LT, and 119 months (95% CI: 74-133 months) and a 52.8% 5-year OS after LR (HR=0.59, 95% CI: 0.3-0.9, P =0.022). However, the survival benefit after LT was lost if patients were transplanted outside Milan criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentric study in patients with NELM demonstrates a survival benefit of LT over LR. This benefit depends on adherence to selection criteria, in particular low-grade tumor biology and Milan criteria, and must be balanced against potential risks of LT.

FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multi-institutional, Patient-Level, Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer often presents as locally advanced (LAPC) or borderline resectable (BRPC). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy is recommended as initial treatment. It is currently unclear what chemotherapy should be preferred for patients with BRPC or LAPC. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and multi-institutional meta-analysis of patient-level data regarding the use of initial systemic therapy for BRPC and LAPC. Outcomes were reported separately for tumor entity and by chemotherapy regimen including FOLFIRINOX (FIO) or gemcitabine-based. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies comprising 2930 patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) calculated from the beginning of systemic treatment. OS for patients with BRPC was 22.0 months with FIO, 16.9 months with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/nab), 21.6 months with gemcitabine/cisplatin or oxaliplatin or docetaxel or capecitabine (GemX), and 10 months with gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem-mono) (p < 0.0001). In patients with LAPC, OS also was higher with FIO (17.1 months) compared with Gem/nab (12.5 months), GemX (12.3 months), and Gem-mono (9.4 months; p < 0.0001). This difference was driven by the patients who did not undergo surgery, where FIO was superior to other regimens. The resection rates for patients with BRPC were 0.55 for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and 0.53 with FIO. In patients with LAPC, resection rates were 0.19 with Gemcitabine and 0.28 with FIO. In resected patients, OS for patients with BRPC was 32.9 months with FIO and not different compared to Gem/nab, (28.6 months, p = 0.285), GemX (38.8 months, p = 0.1), or Gem-mono (23.1 months, p = 0.083). A similar trend was observed in resected patients converted from LAPC. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BRPC or LAPC, primary treatment with FOLFIRINOX compared with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy appears to provide a survival benefit for patients that are ultimately unresectable. For patients that undergo surgical resection, outcomes are similar between GEM+ and FOLFIRINOX when delivered in the neoadjuvant setting.

What have we learnt from the past - would treatment decisions for GEP-NET patients differ between 2012 to 2016 by the new recommendations in 2022?

BACKGROUND: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a heterogeneous group of tumors with a broad range of local and systemic treatment options. Still a lack of data regarding treatment sequences exists. The aim of this study was to analyse outcomes in GEP-NETs depending on stage and treatment steps and compare our treatment decisions to the latest treatment recommendations of European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) 2020 for GEP-NETs. METHODS: Patients were included in this retrospective single-center analysis from 2012-2016. All patients suffering from a GEP-NET, who were screened, treated or evaluated at ENETS Center in Zurich, Switzerland were included in analysis. Patients with any other diagnosis of NET were not included. We used Kaplan Meier estimator as well as Cox regression to compare survival rates between different sites of localization, grades or stages and treatment sequences. RESULTS: Overall, we identified 256 GEP-NETs, most in advanced stage (62%) and located in small intestine tract or pancreatic gland. Survival depended on stage, grade, primary site and duration of response for the early systemic treatment. On average patients underwent 2.6 different treatment modalities, mostly depending on stage and higher tumor grade. Surgery was performed early but also in advanced stages, usually followed by Somatostatine-Agonist modalities. In distant disease (Stage IV), we investigated a positive effect of PFS after treatment with Somatostatine Analogues (SSA) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 - 0.97; p = 0.04) and systemic treatment (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26 - 0.99; p = 0.047) if patients underwent prior surgery or endoscopic resection. Kaplan Meier distributions predict shorter OS in distant disease (Stage IV), (Figure. 1; HR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.46 - 2.89; log-rank test, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis presents a great overview of all patients', disease and treatment characteristics of GEP-NETs at ENETS Center in Zurich, Switzerland. We illustrated survival (PFS) depending on implemented therapies. According to these findings, we formed a suggested treatment algorithm for advanced GEP-NETs, which does not differ from the latest treatment recommendation by ESMO guidelines for GEP-NETs. The results of this project may define GEP-NET patients' selection for upcoming clinical prospective studies.

Self-expandable metallic stent as bridge to surgery vs. emergency resection in obstructive right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emergency resection is common for malignant right-sided obstructive colon cancer. As there is evidence showing a potential benefit of self-expandable metal stents as a bridge to surgery, a new debate has been initiated. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare self-expandable metal stents with emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer. DATA SOURCE: A systematic search was conducted accessing Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting either emergency surgery or stent placement in right-sided obstructive colon cancer were included. INTERVENTION: Stent or emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Morbidity rate, mortality rate, stoma rate, laparoscopic resection rate, anastomotic insufficiency rate, success rate of stent. RESULTS: A total of 6343 patients from 16 publications were analyzed. The stent success rate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.95) with perforation of 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06). Emergency resection was performed laparoscopically at a rate of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.24). Primary anastomosis rate in emergency resection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) with an anastomotic insufficiency rate of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.11). The mortality rate after emergency resection was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Primary anastomosis and anastomotic insufficiency rate were similar between the two groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.1; p = 0.56 and RR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.93; p = 0.33). The mortality rate in emergency resection was higher compared to stent (RR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 10.89, p = 0.016). LIMITATION: No randomized controlled trials are available. CONCLUSION: Stent is a safe and successful alternative to emergency resection and may increase the rate of minimally invasive surgery. Emergency resection, however, remains safe and did not result in higher rate of anastomotic insufficiency. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Serum procalcitonin improves diagnosis of infectious complications after CRS/HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improve the survival of selected patients with peritoneal metastasis. A major cause of treatment-related morbidity after CRS/HIPEC is infection and sepsis. HIPEC alters the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of blood and serum markers and therefore has an impact on early diagnosis of postoperative complications. This study aimed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of blood and serum markers after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: Patients from two centers, operated between 2009 and 2017, were enrolled in this study. Perioperative blood samples were analyzed for white blood cells (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT); postoperative complications were graded according to Clavien-Dindo and infectious complications according to CDC criteria. RESULTS: Overall, n=248 patients were included with peritoneal metastasis from different primary tumors treated by CRS/HIPEC. Depending on the applied HIPEC protocol, patients presented a suppressed WBC response to infection. In addition, a secondary and unspecific CRP elevation in absence of an underlining infection, and pronounced after prolonged perfusion for more than 60 min. PCT was identified as a highly specific - although less sensitive - marker to diagnose infectious complications after CRS/HIPEC. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Sensitivity and specificity of WBC counts and CRP values to diagnose postoperative infection are limited in the context of HIPEC. PCT is helpful to specify suspected infection. Overall, diagnosis of postoperative complications remains a clinical diagnosis, requiring surgical expertise and experience.

Low-dose aspirin confers protection against acute cellular allograft rejection after primary liver transplantation.

This study investigated the effect of low-dose aspirin in primary adult liver transplantation (LT) on acute cellular rejection (ACR) as well as arterial patency rates. The use of low-dose aspirin after LT is practiced by many transplant centers to minimize the risk of hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT), although solid recommendations do not exist. However, aspirin also possesses potent anti-inflammatory properties and might mitigate inflammatory processes after LT, such as rejection. Therefore, we hypothesized that the use of aspirin after LT has a protective effect against ACR. This is an international, multicenter cohort study of primary adult deceased donor LT. The study included 17 high-volume LT centers and covered the 3-year period from 2013 to 2015 to allow a minimum 5-year follow-up. In this cohort of 2365 patients, prophylactic antiplatelet therapy with low-dose aspirin was administered in 1436 recipients (61%). The 1-year rejection-free survival rate was 89% in the aspirin group versus 82% in the no-aspirin group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.94; p = 0.01). The 1-year primary arterial patency rates were 99% in the aspirin group and 96% in the no-aspirin group with an HR of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.13-0.40; p < 0.001). Low-dose aspirin was associated with a lower risk of ACR and HAT after LT, especially in the first vulnerable year after transplantation. Therefore, low-dose aspirin use after primary LT should be evaluated to protect the liver graft from ACR and to maintain arterial patency.

Long-term outcomes of transplant kidneys donated after circulatory death.

BACKGROUND: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) represents up to 40% of used kidney grafts. While studies have shown similar outcomes compared with donation after brain death (DBD) in the short term and mid-term, no data on long-term outcomes exist. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed patients transplanted at our institution between January 1985 and March 2000. All DCD recipients were matched one-to-one with patients transplanted with DBD grafts during this period according to sex, age and year of transplantation and followed up until December 2020. During this period, 1133 kidney transplantations were performed, of which 122 were with a DCD graft. RESULTS: The median graft survival after 35 years of follow-up was 23 years [277 months {95% confidence interval (CI) 182-372}] in DBD recipients and 24.5 years [289 months (95% CI 245-333)] in DCD recipients (P = 0.65; hazard ratio 0.91). Delayed graft function occurred in 47 patients in the DCD group compared with 23 in the DBD group (P < 0.001), albeit without a significant long-term outcome difference in graft or patient survival. We could not show any difference in graft function in terms of creatinine levels (133 versus 119 µmol/L), proteinuria (370 versus 240 mg/24 h) and glomerular filtration rate slope (-0.6 versus -0.3 mL/min/year) between the two groups for graft survival >20 years. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to show similar graft survival and function in DCD kidneys compared with DBD kidneys after 35 years of follow-up. DCD grafts are a valuable resource and can be utilized in the same way as DBD grafts.

A systematic review of the perforated duodenal diverticula: lessons learned from the last decade.

BACKGROUND: The perforated duodenal diverticulum remains a rare clinical entity, the optimal management of which has not been well established. Historically, primary surgery has been the preferred treatment modality. This was called into question during the last decade, with the successful application of non-operative therapy in selected patients. The aim of this systematic review is to identify cases of perforated duodenal diverticula published over the past decade and to assess any subsequent evolution in treatment. METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles reporting on perforated duodenal diverticula using MEDLINE (2008-2020) was performed. Only cases of perforated duodenal diverticula in adults (> 18 years) that reported on diagnosis and treatment were included. RESULTS: Some 328 studies were identified, of which 31 articles met the inclusion criteria. These studies included a total of 47 patients with perforated duodenal diverticula. This series suggests a trend towards conservative management with 34% (16/47) of patients managed non-operatively. In 31% (5/16) patients initially managed conservatively, a step-up approach to surgical intervention was required. CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment of perforated duodenal diverticula appears to be an acceptable and safe treatment strategy in stable patients without signs of peritonitis under careful observation. For patients who fail to respond to conservative treatment, a step-up approach to percutaneous drainage or surgery can be applied. If surgery is required, competence in techniques ranging from simple diverticulectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric diversion or even Whipple's procedure may be required depending on tissue friability and diverticular collar size.

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) vs CRS alone for treatment of endometrial cancer with peritoneal metastases: a multi-institutional study from PSOGI and BIG RENAPE groups.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the benefit of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of endometrial peritoneal carcinomatosis compared to CRS alone. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicentre study of patients from experienced centres in treating peritoneal malignancies from 2002 to 2015. Patients who underwent surgery for peritoneal evolution of endometrial cancer (EC) were included. Two groups of 30 women were matched and compared: "CRS + HIPEC" which used HIPEC after CRS, and "CRS only" which did not use HIPEC. We analysed clinical, pathologic and treatment data for patients with peritoneal metastases from EC. The outcome measures were morbidity, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In "CRS plus HIPEC" group, 96.7% of women were treated for recurrence, while in "CRS only" 83.3 were treated for primary disease. There was no significant difference between Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index at laparotomy or Completeness of Cytoreduction score. Grade III and IV complications rates did not significantly differ between "CRS plus HIPEC" group and "CRS only" group (20.7% vs 20.7%, p = 0.739). Survival analysis showed no statistical difference between both groups. Median OS time was 19.2 months in "CRS plus HIPEC" group and 29.7 months in "CRS only" group (p = 0.606). Median PFS survival time was 10.7 months in "CRS plus HIPEC" group and 13.1 months in "CRS only" group (p = 0.511). CONCLUSION: The use of HIPEC combined to CRS did not have any significance as regard the DFS and OS over CRS alone in patients with primary or recurrent peritoneal metastasis of endometrial cancer.

Gastric cancer with positive peritoneal cytology: survival benefit after induction chemotherapy and conversion to negative peritoneal cytology.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment in patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal disease remains controversial. Some guidelines indicate palliative treatment only, while others consider surgical treatment in case of positive lavage cytology (CY+) or limited peritoneal disease. Here, we analyzed the role of peritoneal disease in patients with gastric cancer, and the prognostic relevance of response to neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis, we analyzed patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach or esophago-gastric junction from a single center operated between 2011 and 2019. According to histology and lavage cytology, patients were classified into four risk groups: (A) no peritoneal disease, (B) CY+ who converted to negative lavage cytology (CY-) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, (C) CY+ without conversion after chemotherapy, and (D) patients with visible peritoneal metastasis. RESULTS: Overall, n = 172 patients were included. At initial presentation, n = 125 (73%) had no peritoneal disease, and about a third of patients (n = 47, 27%) had microscopic or macroscopic peritoneal disease. Among them, n = 14 (8%) were CY+ without visible peritoneal metastasis, n = 9 converted to CY- after chemotherapy, and in n = 5 no conversion was observed. Median overall survival was not reached in patients who had initially no peritoneal disease and in patients who converted after chemotherapy, resulting in 3-year survival rates of 65% and 53%. In contrast, median overall survival was reduced to 13 months (95% CI 8.7-16.7) in patients without conversion and was 16 months (95% CI 12-20.5) in patients with peritoneal metastasis without difference between the two groups (p = .364). The conversion rate from CY+ to CY- was significantly higher after neoadjuvant treatment with FLOT (5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel) compared to ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil) (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Conversion of CY+ to CY- after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FLOT is a significant prognostic factor for a better overall survival. Surgical treatment in well-selected patients should therefore be considered. However, peritoneal recurrence remains frequent despite conversion, urging for a better local control.

Standard Operating Procedures for Anesthesia Management in Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Improve Patient Outcomes: A Patient Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) offer survival benefits in well-selected patients with peritoneal tumors. The complexity of CRS/HIPEC requires surgical specialization. In contrast, limited data are available regarding the impact of anesthesia management. We assessed the role of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for anesthesia on perioperative patient outcomes after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2015, 112 CRS/HIPEC were performed at the University Hospital of Zurich. Procedures were grouped in an "early or late" group before (n = 57) and after (n = 55) the introduction of SOPs, which defined management of fluids, serum albumin, hemostasis, and body temperature. RESULTS: Introduction of SOPs significantly changed patient management. Patients received in total less colloids (p = 0.03) and less diuretics (p = 0.007). We noticed an increased substitution of albumin (p = 0.001) and coagulation factors (p = 0.008). Body temperatures were higher at the end of the operation (p = 0.005), and more patients were extubated in the operating room (66% vs. 42%, p = 0.02). The rate of major complications (p = 0.003) and reoperations (p = 0.01) was reduced after the introduction of SOPs. On multivariate analysis, two independent prognostic factors were identified. The use of > 2000 mL of colloids [odds ratio (OR) 5.31 (1.06-26.56), p = 0.042] was associated with major morbidity. In contrast, substitution of albumin [OR 0.12 (0.01-0.96), p = 0.046] was associated with better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SOPs for perioperative anesthesia management have a major impact on outcomes of patients after CRS/HIPEC. Management of colloid administration was an independent prognostic factor for perioperative outcomes. This highlights the role of the anesthesiologist and the need for specialization beyond the surgical team.

Mutations of RAS/RAF Proto-oncogenes Impair Survival After Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC for Peritoneal Metastasis of Colorectal Origin.

BACKGROUND: Adequate selection of patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains critical for successful long-term outcomes. Factors reflecting tumor biology are currently poorly represented in the selection process. The prognostic relevance of RAS/RAF mutations in patients with PM remains unclear. METHODS: Survival data of patients with colorectal PM operated in 6 European tertiary centers were retrospectively collected and predictive factors for survival identified by Cox regression analyses. A simple point-based risk score was developed to allow patient selection and outcome prediction. RESULTS: Data of 524 patients with a median age of 59 years and a median peritoneal cancer index of 7 (interquartile range: 3-12) were collected. A complete resection was possible in 505 patients; overall morbidity and 90-day mortality were 50.9% and 2.1%, respectively. PCI [hazard ratio (HR): 1.08], N1 stage (HR: 2.15), N2 stage (HR: 2.57), G3 stage (HR: 1.80) as well as KRAS (HR: 1.46) and BRAF (HR: 3.97) mutations were found to significantly impair survival after CRS/HIPEC on multivariate analyses. Mutations of RAS/RAF impaired survival independently of targeted treatment against EGFR. Consequently, a simple point-based risk score termed BIOSCOPE (BIOlogical Score of COlorectal PEritoneal metastasis) based on PCI, N-, G-, and RAS/RAF status was developed, which showed good discrimination [development area under the curve (AUC) = 0.72, validation AUC = 0.70], calibration (P = 0.401) and allowed categorization of patients into 4 groups with strongly divergent survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: RAS/RAF mutations impair survival after CRS/HIPEC. The novel BIOSCOPE score reflects tumor biology, adequately stratifies long-term outcomes, and improves patient assessment and selection.

18FDG-PET-CT identifies histopathological non-responders after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric and cardia cancer: cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTX) is a prognostic factor in many cancer types, and early prediction would help to modify treatment. In patients with gastric and esophagogastric junction (AEG) cancer, the accuracy of FDG PET-CT to predict early pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoCTX) is currently not known. METHODS: From a consecutive cohort of 72 patients, 44 patients with resectable, locally-advanced gastric cancer or AEG Siewert type II and III received neoCTX after primary staging with endoscopic ultrasound, PET-CT and laparoscopy. Overall, 14 patients did not show FDG uptake, and the remaining 30 were restaged by PET-CT 14 days after the first cycle of neoCTX. Metabolic response was defined as decrease of tumor standardized uptake value (SUV) by ≥35%. Major pathologic regression was defined as less than 10% residual tumor cells. RESULTS: Metabolic response after neoCTX was detected in 20/30 (66.7%), and non-response in 10/30 (33.3%) patients. Among metabolic responders, n = 10 (50%) showed major and n = 10 (50%) minor pathologic regression. In non-responders, n = 9 (90%) had minor and 1 (10%) a major pathologic regression. This resulted in a sensitivity of 90.9%, specificity 47.3%, positive predictive value 50%, negative predictive value 90% and accuracy of 63.3%. CONCLUSION: Response PET-CT after the first cycle of neoCTX does not accurately predict overall pathologic response. However, PET-CT reliably detects non-responders, and identifies patients who should either immediately proceed to resection or receive a modified multimodality therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered and approved by local ethics committee PB_2016-00769.

Major Postoperative Complications Are a Risk Factor for Impaired Survival after CRS/HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a combined treatment option for well-selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). The study aimed to identify factors influencing cancer-specific survival (CSS) and disease-free survival (DFS). METHODS: Data of 113 patients with colorectal or appendicular carcinomatosis from a single center operated between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Patients with high-grade tumors received standard perioperative chemotherapy, and patients with low-grade appendix tumors were directly operated. HIPEC was performed after radical CRS. RESULTS: Patients had carcinomatosis from appendix neoplasms in 63% (71/113), including low-grade and high-grade tumors, and colorectal cancer in 37% (42/113). Complete cytoreduction and HIPEC were possible in 67% of patients. Major morbidity occurred in 10.6% of patients, and mean follow-up was 28 months. For colorectal PC, median CSS and DFS were 40 and 12 months, respectively. Median DFS was 19 months for high-grade appendix tumors, while median CSS has not been reached. All patients with diffuse peritoneal adenomucinosis were still alive at time of analysis; rate of DFS was 96% for these patients after 3 years. Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo IIIB or higher) and positive nodal state were associated with impaired CSS and DFS, while a peritoneal cancer index score of >10 was independently associated with impaired CSS. CONCLUSIONS: CRS/HIPEC offers a survival benefit in well-selected patients with PC. Major postoperative complications affect long-term oncologic outcome of these patients.

Intractable ascites associated with mycophenolate in a simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant patient: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolic acid (MPA), either given as an ester pro-drug or as an enteric-coated sodium salt, is the most commonly prescribed anti-proliferative immunosuppressive agent used following organ transplantation and widely applied in immune-mediated diseases. Clinicians are well aware of common adverse reactions related to MPA treatment, in particular diarrhea, leukopenia and infections. Here we report a case of severe, persistent ascites associated with MPA treatment. The otherwise unexplained and intractable ascites, requiring repeated paracenteses for more than 8 months, rapidly ceased with stopping the MPA treatment. To our knowledge this is the first case of severe ascites associated with MPA treatment reported in the scientific literature. CASE PRESENTATION: A 45-year old female with type 1 diabetes mellitus received a simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant. The surgery was uneventful. However, post-operatively she developed severe transudative ascites requiring in total more than 40 paracenteses treatments draining in the average 2.8 l of ascites fluid. The ascites formation persisted despite exclusion of a surgical complication, fully functioning kidney and pancreas allografts, lack of any significant proteinuria, normalization of circulating albumin levels, intensive use of diuretics and deliberate attempts to increase the intervals between the paracentesis treatments. Various differential diagnoses, including infectious, hepatic, vascular and cardiac causes were ruled out. Nine months after surgery enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium was switched to azathioprine after which ascites completely resolved. When mycophenolate was recommenced abdominal fullness and weight gain reoccurred. The patient had to be switched to long-term azathioprine treatment. More than 1 year post-conversion the patient remains free of ascites. CONCLUSION: MPA is the most widely used antimetabolite immunosuppressive agent. We suggest to consider MPA treatment in the differential diagnosis of severe and unexplained ascites in transplant and non-transplant patients.

Where Oncologic and Surgical Complication Scoring Systems Collide: Time for a New Consensus for CRS/HIPEC.

INTRODUCTION: Morbidity and mortality rates after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are important quality parameters to compare peritoneal surface malignancy centers. A major problem to assess postoperative outcomes among centers is the inconsistent reporting due to two coexisting systems, the diagnose-based common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) classification and the therapy-oriented Clavien-Dindo classification. We therefore assessed and compared both reporting systems. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Complications after CRS/HIPEC were recorded in 147 consecutive patients and independently graded by an expert board using both systems. In a next step, a group of residents, experienced surgeons, and medical oncologists evaluated a set of twelve real complications, either with the Clavien-Dindo or CTCAE classification. RESULTS: The postoperative complication rate after CRS/HIPEC was 37 % (54/147), 6.8 % (10/147) were reoperated, and three (2 %) patients died. The most frequent complications were intestinal fistula or abscess, pulmonary complications, and ileus. Grading of complications with the CTCAE classification resulted in a significantly higher major morbidity rate compared to the Clavien-Dindo classification (25 vs. 8 %, p = 0.001). Evaluating a set of complications, residents, surgeons, and oncologists correctly assessed significantly more complications with the Clavien-Dindo compared to the CTCEA classification (p < 0.001). In addition, all participants evaluated the Clavien-Dindo classification as more simple. Residents (p < 0.001) and surgeons (p < 0.01) required less time with the Clavien-Dindo classification; there was no difference for oncologist. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our data indicate that there is a different interpretation of severity grades of complications after CRS/HIPEC between the two classifications. There is a need for a common language in the field of CRS/HIPEC, which should be defined by a new consensus to compare surgical outcomes.