Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) implementation in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Insights from Italian peritoneal surface malignancies expert centers.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a complex procedure that involves extensive peritoneal and visceral resections followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program aims to achieve faster recovery by maintaining pre-operative organ function and reducing the stress response following surgery. A recent publication introduced dedicated ERAS guidelines for CRS and HIPEC with the aim of extending the benefits to patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. METHODS: A survey was conducted among 21 Italian centers specializing in peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) treatment to assess adherence to ERAS guidelines. The survey covered pre/intraoperative and postoperative ERAS items and explored attitudes towards ERAS implementation. RESULTS: All centers completed the survey, demonstrating expertise in PSM treatment. However, less than 30 % of centers adopted ERAS protocols despite being aware of dedicated guidelines. Preoperative optimization was common, with variations in bowel preparation methods and fasting periods. Intraoperative normothermia control was consistent, but fluid management practices varied. Postoperative practices, including routine abdominal drain placement and NGT management, varied greatly among centers. The majority of respondents expressed an intention to implement ERAS, citing concerns about feasibility and organizational challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The study concludes that Italian centers specialized in PSM treatment have limited adoption of ERAS protocols for CRS ± HIPEC, despite being aware of guidelines. The variability in practice highlights the need for standardized approaches and further evaluation of ERAS applicability in this complex surgical setting to optimize patient care.

Benefit of a multimodal approach combining chemotherapy and surgery in oligometastatic gastric cancer: experience from a tertiary referral center.

Introduction: Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide with limited therapeutic options. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of adding surgery to the first-line treatment in patients with oligometastatic GC (OGC). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with OGC who underwent induction chemotherapy followed by surgery of both primary tumor and synchronous metastasis between April 2012 and April 2022. Endpoints were overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were assessed with the Cox model. Results: Data from 39 patients were collected. All cases were referred to our multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) to evaluate the feasibility of radical surgery. After a median follow-up of 33.6 months (mo.), median OS was 26.6 mo. (95% CI 23.8-29.4) and median RFS was 10.6 mo. (95% CI 6.3-14.8). Pathologic response according to the Mandard criteria (TRG 1-3, not reached versus 20.5 mo. for TRG 4-5; HR 0.23, p=0.019), PS ECOG ≤ 1 (26.7 mo. for PS ≤ 1 versus 11.2 mo. for PS >1; HR 0.3, p=0.022) and a low metastatic burden (26.7 mo. for single site versus 12.9 mo. for ≥2 sites; HR 0.34, p=0.039) were related to good prognosis. No major intraoperative complications nor surgery-related deaths occurred in our series. Discussion: A sequential strategy of preoperative chemotherapy and radical surgical excision of both primary tumor and metastases was demonstrated to significantly improve OS and RFS. Multidisciplinary evaluation is mandatory to identify patients who could benefit from this strategy.

Efficacy of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) + HIPEC in Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis is one of deadliest metastatic patterns of gastric cancer, being associated with a median overall survival (OS) of 4 months. Up to now, palliative systemic chemotherapy (pSC) has been the only recommended treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate a potential survival benefit after CRS + HIPEC compared to pSC. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines in March 2024. Manuscripts reporting patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer treated with CRS + HIPEC were included. A meta-analysis was performed, comparing the survival results between the CRS + HIPEC and pSC groups, and the primary outcome was the comparison in terms of OS. We performed random-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs). We assessed heterogeneity using the Q2 statistic. RESULTS: Out of the 24 papers included, 1369 patients underwent CRS + HIPEC, with a median OS range of 9.8-28.2 months; and 103 patients underwent pSC, with a median OS range of 4.9-8 months. CRS + HIPEC was associated with significantly increased survival compared to palliative systemic chemotherapy (-1.8954 (95% CI: -2.5761 to -1.2146; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CRS + HIPEC could provide survival advantages in gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis compared to pSC.

Is Systemic Chemotherapy Useful in Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases? A Propensity-Score Analysis.

PURPOSE: Multimodal treatment of colorectal (CRC) peritoneal metastases (PM) includes systemic chemotherapy (SC) and surgical cytoreduction (CRS), eventually with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), in select patients. Considering lack of clear guidelines, this study was designed to analyze the role of chemotherapy and its timing in patients treated with CRS-HIPEC. METHODS: Data from 13 Italian centers with PM expertise were collected by a collaborative group of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO). Clinicopathological variables, SC use, and timing of administration were correlated with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local (peritoneal) DFS (LDFS) after propensity-score (PS) weighting to reduce confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 367 patients treated with CRS-HIPEC were included in the propensity-score weighting. Of the total patients, 19.9% did not receive chemotherapy within 6 months of surgery, 32.4% received chemotherapy before surgery (pregroup), 28.9% after (post), and 18.8% received both pre- and post-CRS-HIPEC treatment (peri). SC was preferentially administered to younger (p = 0.02) and node-positive (p = 0.010) patients. Preoperative SC is associated with increased rate of major complications (26.9 vs. 11.3%, p = 0.0009). After PS weighting, there were no differences in OS, DFS, or LDFS (p = 0.56, 0.50, and 0.17) between chemotherapy-treated and untreated patients. Considering SC timing, the post CRS-HIPEC group had a longer DFS and LDFS than the pre-group (median DFS 15.4 vs. 9.8 m, p = 0.003; median LDFS 26.3 vs. 15.8 m, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CRC-PM treated with CRS-HIPEC, systemic chemotherapy was not associated with overall survival benefit. The adjuvant schedule was related to prolonged disease-free intervals. Additional, randomized studies are required to clarify the role and timing of systemic chemotherapy in this patient subset.

Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Applied to Platinum-Resistant Recurrence of Ovarian Tumor: A Single-Institution Experience (ID: PARROT Trial).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in platinum-resistant recurrence of ovarian cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis, while our secondary endpoint was to establish any changes in quality of life estimated via the EORTC QLQ-30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires. METHODS: In this monocentric, single-arm, phase II trial, women were prospectively recruited and every 28-42 days underwent courses of PIPAC with doxorubicin 2.1 mg/m2 followed by cisplatin 10.5 mg/m2 via sequential laparoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, 98 PIPAC procedures were performed on 43 women from January 2016 to January 2020; three procedures were aborted due to extensive intra-abdominal adhesions. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was reached in 82% of women. Three cycles of PIPAC were completed in 18 women (45%), and 13 (32.5%) and 9 (22.5%) patients were subjected to one and two cycles, respectively. During two PIPAC procedures, patients experienced an intraoperative intestinal perforation. There were no treatment-related deaths. Nineteen patients showed no response according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and 8 patients showed minor response according to the PRGS. Median time from ovarian cancer relapse to disease progression was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.483-17.517), while the median overall survival was 27 months (95% CI 20.337-33.663). The EORTC QLQ-28 and EORTC QLQ-30 scores did not worsen during therapy. CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC seems a feasible approach for the treatment of this subset of patients, without any impact on their quality of life. Since this study had a small sample size and a single-center design, future research is mandatory, such as its application in addition to systemic chemotherapy.

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: a single center outline and comparison of different surgical and intraperitoneal treatments.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) has an unfavourable prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) are promising treatment options that have been shown to improve survival. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of different treatments such as systemic chemotherapy, systemic chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC in patients with GCPM. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study included 82 patients with GCPM treated between January 2016 and June 2021. After first-line chemotherapy, depending on disease response and burden, the patients were divided into three treatment groups: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis, which was compared among the treatment groups. RESULTS: Thirty-seven (45.1%) patients were administered systemic chemotherapy alone, 25 (30.4%) received chemotherapy + PIPAC, and 20 (24.4%) underwent CRS + HIPEC. The CRS + HIPEC group had better OS (median 24 months) than the PIPAC group (15 months, p = 0.01) and chemotherapy group (5 months, p = 0.0001). Following CRS + HIPEC, the postoperative grade 3-4 complication rate was 25%, and no postoperative in-hospital deaths occurred. The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 12 months. Multivariate analysis identified peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) > 7 as an independent predictor of worse DFS. No independent predictors of OS were identified. CONCLUSION: Among patients with GCPM, we identified a highly selected population with oligometastatic disease. In this group, CRS + HIPEC provided a significant survival advantage with an acceptable major complication rate compared with other available therapies (systemic chemotherapy alone or in combination with PIPAC).

Descriptive review of current practices and prognostic factors in patients with ovarian cancer treated by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): a multicentric, retrospective, cohort of 234 patients.

Introduction: Ovarian cancer (OC) is the primary cause of mortality in women diagnosed with gynecological cancer. Our study assessed pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) as treatment for peritoneal surface metastases (PSM) from recurrent or progressive OC and conducted survival analyses to identify prognostic factors. Material and methods: This retrospective cohort study, conducted across 18 international centers, analyzed the clinical practices of patients receiving palliative treatment for PSM from OC who underwent PIPAC. All patients were initially treated appropriately outside any clinical trial setting. Feasibility, safety, and morbidity were evaluated along with objective endpoints of oncological response. Multivariate analysis identified prognostic factors for OS and PFS. Results: From 2015-2020, 234 consecutive patients were studied, from which 192 patients were included and stratified by platinum sensitivity for analysis. Patients with early recurrence, within one postoperative month, were excluded. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding platinum sensitivity (platinum sensitive (PS) and resistant (PR)), but chemotherapy frequency differed, as did PCI before PIPAC. Median PCI decreased in both groups after three cycles of PIPAC (PS 16 vs. 12, p < 0.001; PR 24 vs. 20, p = 0.009). Overall morbidity was 22%, with few severe complications (4-8%) or mortality (0-3%). Higher pathological response and longer OS (22 vs. 11m, p = 0.012) and PFS (12 vs. 7m, p = 0.033) were observed in the PS group. Multivariate analysis (OS/PFS) identified ascites (HR 4.02, p < 0.001/5.22, p < 0.001), positive cytology at first PIPAC (HR 3.91, p = 0.002/1.96, p = 0.035), and ≥ 3 PIPACs (HR 0.30, p = 0.002/0.48, p = 0.017) as independent prognostic factors of overall survival/progression-free survival. Conclusions: With low morbidity and mortality rates, PIPAC is a safe option for palliative treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Promising results were observed after 3 PIPAC, which did improve the peritoneal burden. However, further research is needed to evaluate the potential role of PIPAC as an independent prognostic factor.

10 Years of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel intraperitoneal drug delivery method of low-dose chemotherapy as a pressurized aerosol in patients affected by peritoneal cancer of primary or secondary origin. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of assessing the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of PIPAC. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using Medline and Web of Science databases from 1 January 2011, to inception, to 31 December 2021. Data were independently extracted by two authors. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of studies. Meta-analysis was performed for pathological response, radiological response, PCI variation along treatment, and for patients undergoing three or more PIPAC. Pooled analyses were performed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation, and 95% CIs were calculated using Clopper-Pearson exact CIs in all instances. RESULTS: A total of 414 papers on PIPAC were identified, and 53 studies considering 4719 PIPAC procedure in 1990 patients were included for analysis. The non-access rate or inability to perform PIPAC pooled rate was 4% of the procedures performed. The overall proportion of patients who completed 3 or more cycles of PIPAC was 39%. Severe toxicities considering CTCAE 3-4 were 4% (0% to 38.5%). In total, 50 studies evaluated deaths within the first 30 postoperative days. In the included 1936 patients were registered 26 deaths (1.3%). The pooled analysis of all the studies reporting a pathological response was 68% (95% CI 0.61-0.73), with an acceptable heterogeneity (I2 28.41%, p = 0.09). In total, 10 papers reported data regarding the radiological response, with high heterogeneity and a weighted means of 15% (0% to 77.8%). PCI variation along PIPAC cycles were reported in 14 studies. PCI diminished, increased, or remained stable in eight, one and five studies, respectively, with high heterogeneity at pooled analysis. Regarding survival, there was high heterogeneity. The 12-month estimated survival from first PIPAC for colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, gynecological cancer and hepatobiliary/pancreatic cancer were, respectively, 53%, 25%, 59% and 37%. CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC may be a useful treatment option for selected patients with PM, with acceptable grade 3 and 4 toxicity and promising survival benefit. Meta-analysis showed high heterogeneity of data among up-to-date available studies. In a subset analysis per primary tumor origin, pathological tumor regression was documented in 68% of the studies with acceptable heterogeneity. Pathological regression seems, therefore, a reliable outcome for PIPAC activity and a potential surrogate endpoint of treatment response. We recommend uniform selection criteria for patients entering a PIPAC program and highlight the urgent need to standardize items for PIPAC reports and datasets.

Rare recurrence of malignant mesothelioma spreading to the perineum.

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare aggressive tumour of the mesothelium with a propensity to spread locally and, rarely, to distant organs. The latest advances in its diagnosis and treatment have led to an increase in unusual disease presentations. Although a direct invasion of the perineum has been previously described in a men, a malignant mesothelioma spreading to the perianal region was never reported in a women. We presented a rare case of malignant mesothelioma recurrence spreading from the peritoneal cavity to the perineum through the rectovaginal space.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Program for Patients with Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with or without HIPEC: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program refers to a multimodal intervention to reduce the length of stay and postoperative complications; it has been effective in different kinds of major surgery including colorectal, gynaecologic and gastric cancer surgery. Its impact in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies is still unclear. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of ERAS after cytoreductive surgery with or without HIPEC for peritoneal metastases. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Database were searched from January 2010 and December 2021. Single and double-cohort studies about ERAS application in the treatment of peritoneal cancer were considered. Outcomes included the postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and the early readmission rate. Twenty-four studies involving 5131 patients were considered, 7 about ERAS in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + HIPEC and 17 about cytoreductive alone; the case histories of two Italian referral centers in the management of peritoneal cancer were included. ERAS adoption reduced the LOS (-3.17, 95% CrI -4.68 to -1.69 in CRS + HIPEC and -1.65, 95% CrI -2.32 to -1.06 in CRS alone in the meta-analysis including 6 and 17 studies respectively. Non negligible lower postoperative morbidity was also in the meta-analysis including the case histories of two Italian referral centers. Implementation of an ERAS protocol may reduce LOS, postoperative complications after CRS with or without HIPEC compared to conventional recovery.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Algorithm for Appendiceal Tumors and Pseudomyxoma Peritonei: A Consensus of the Peritoneal Malignancies Oncoteam of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO).

Aim: Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is an uncommon pathology, and its rarity causes a lack of scientific evidence, precluding the design of a prospective trial. A diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm (DTA) is necessary in order to standardize the disease treatment while balancing optimal patient management and the correct use of resources. The Consensus of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) Oncoteam aims at defining a diagnostic and therapeutic pathway for PMP and appendiceal primary tumors applicable in Italian healthcare. Method: The consensus panel included 10 delegated representatives of oncological referral centers for Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (PSM) affiliated to the SICO PSM Oncoteam. A list of statements regarding the DTA of patients with PMP was prepared according to recommendations based on the review of the literature and expert opinion. Results: A consensus was obtained on 33 of the 34 statements linked to the DTA; two flowcharts regarding the management of primary appendiceal cancer and peritoneal disease were approved. Conclusion: Currently, consensus has been reached on pathological classification, preoperative evaluation, cytoreductive surgery technical detail, and systemic treatment; some controversies still exist regarding the exclusion criteria for HIPEC treatment. A shared Italian model of DTA is an essential tool to ensure the appropriateness and equity of treatment for these patients.

External validation of COMPASS and BIOSCOPE prognostic scores in colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

INTRODUCTION: The selection of patients undergoing cytoreductive- surgery (CRS) followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is crucial. BIOSCOPE and COMPASS are prognostic scores designed to stratify survival into four classes according to clinical and pathological features. The purpose of this study is to analyze the prognostic role of these scores using a large cohort of patients as an external reference. METHODS: Overall survival analysis was performed using Log-Rank and Kaplan-Meier curves for each score. The probability of survival at 12, 36, and 60 months was tested using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to determine sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: From the validation cohort of 437 patients, the analysis included 410 patients in the COMPASS group and 364 patients in the BIOSCOPE group (100% data completeness). We observed a different patient distribution between classes (high-risk for BIOSCOPE compared to COMPASS, p = 0.0001). Nevertheless, both COMPASS and BIOSCOPE effectively stratified overall survival (Log-Rank, p = 0.0001 in both cases), with a lack of discrimination between COMPASS classes II and III (p = n.s.). COMPASS at 12 m and BIOSCOPE at 60 m showed the best performance in terms of survival prediction (AUC of 0.82 and 0.81). The specificity of the two tests is good (median 81.3%), whereas sensibility is quite low (median 64.2%). CONCLUSION: Following external validation in a large population of patients with CRC-PM who are eligible for surgery, the COMPASS and BIOSCOPE scores exhibit high inter-test variability but effectively stratify cancer-related mortality risk. While the quality of the scores is similar, BIOSCOPE shows better inter-tier differentiation, suggesting that tumor molecular classification could improve test discrimination capability. More powerful stratification scores with the inclusion of novel predictors are needed.

Complications and Mortality Rate of Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam Results Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy may significantly improve survival for selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies, but it has always been criticized due to the high incidence of postoperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Data were collected from nine Italian centers with peritoneal surface malignancies expertise within a collaborative group of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Complications and mortality rates were recorded, and multivariate Cox analysis was used to identify risk factors. RESULTS: The study included 2576 patients. The procedure was mostly performed for ovarian (27.4%) and colon cancer (22.4%). The median peritoneal cancer index was 13. Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 34% and 1.6%. A total of 232 (9%) patients required surgical reoperation. Multivariate regression logistic analysis identified the type of perfusion (p ≤ 0.0001), body mass index (p ≤ 0.0001), number of resections (p ≤ 0.0001) and colorectal resections (p ≤ 0.0001) as the strongest predictors of complications, whereas the number of resections (p ≤ 0.0001) and age (p = 0.01) were the strongest predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is a valuable option of treatment for selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis providing low postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, if performed in high-volume specialized centers.

Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) and HIPEC for Advanced Ovarian Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: Italian PSM Oncoteam Evidence and Study Purposes.

Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common neoplasm in women with a high mortality rate mainly due to a marked propensity for peritoneal spread directly at diagnosis, as well as tumor recurrence after radical surgical treatment. Treatments for peritoneal metastases have to be designed from a patient's perspective and focus on meaningful measures of benefit. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), a strategy combining maximal cytoreductive surgery with regional chemotherapy, has been proposed to treat advanced ovarian cancer. Preliminary results to date have shown promising results, with improved survival outcomes and tumor regression. As knowledge about the disease process increases, practice guidelines will continue to evolve. In this review, we have reported a broad overview of advanced ovarian cancer management, and an update of the current evidence. The future perspectives of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) are discussed conclusively.

Prophylactic surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC CO2) versus standard surgery in colorectal carcinoma at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis: short-term and long-term outcomes from the CHECK study - protocol for a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

INTRODUCTION: Up to one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer will develop peritoneal metastases, frequently without other districts' involvement. Despite the recent unsuccesses of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases treatment, the rationale in the prophylactic setting remains strong. Several clinical and pharmacokinetic data suggest that the efficacy of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is highest when the disease is microscopic. However, robust evidence demonstrating whether the addition of HIPEC for high-risk colorectal cancers offers better control of local recurrence is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised phase 3 trial comparing prophylactic surgery plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin, over standard surgical excision in patients with colorectal cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; 388 patients will be included in this study. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of prophylactic surgery (radical colorectal resection, omentectomy, appendectomy, round ligament of the liver resection and bilateral adnexectomy) plus HIPEC CO2 with mitomycin and standard surgery in terms of local recurrence-free survival. The main secondary endpoints are disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The primary endpoint will be described with a cumulative incidence function and will be analysed with Grey test to take account of the competing risks. DFS and OS will be described with the Kaplan-Meier method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been evaluated by the Italian Medicines Agency, local ethics committees and will be submitted to the Ministry of Health to notify the start of the trial according to the regulation of trials on devices with CE mark/certification.The results will be submitted for presentation at academic meetings and for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, whatever the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03914820.

Selected Patients With Peritoneal Metastases From Breast Cancer May Benefit From Cytoreductive Surgery: The Results of a Multicenter Survey.

Background: Even though breast cancer is the most frequent extra-abdominal tumor causing peritoneal metastases, clear clinical guidelines are lacking. Our aim is to establish whether cytoreductive surgery (CRS) could be considered in selected patients with peritoneal metastases from breast cancer (PMBC) to manage abdominal spread and allow patients to resume or complete other medical treatments. Methods: We considered patients with PMBC treated in 10 referral centers from January 2002 to May 2019. Clinical data included primary cancer characteristics (age, histology, and TNM) and data on metastatic disease (interval between primary BC and PM, molecular subtype, other metastases, and peritoneal spread). Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariable data for OS were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Of the 49 women with PMBC, 20 were treated with curative aim (CRS with or without HIPEC) and 29 were treated with non-curative procedures. The 10-year OS rate was 27%. Patients treated with curative intent had a better OS than patients treated with non-curative procedures (89.2% vs. 6% at 36 months, p < 0.001). Risk factors significantly influencing survival were age at primary BC, interval between BC and PM diagnosis, extra-peritoneal metastases, and molecular subtype. Conclusions: The improved outcome in selected cases after a multidisciplinary approach including surgery should lead researchers to regard PMBC patients with greater attention despite their scarce epidemiological impact. Our collective efforts give new information, suggest room for improvement, and point to further research for a hitherto poorly studied aspect of metastatic BC.

The Road to Technical Proficiency in Cytoreductive Surgery for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis: Risk-Adjusted Cumulative Summation Analysis.

Background: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is a technically demanding procedure, and there is considerable debate about its safe application. This study investigated the learning curve for CRS and the clinical outcomes of consecutive patients treated by a single surgeon at a single institution. Methods: We collected 251 consecutive patients who underwent CRS for peritoneal metastases by a single surgeon at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, between January 2016 and December 2020. The learning curve was estimated using the cumulative summation analysis (CUSUM) for operative time (OT). Risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM) charts were developed using a composite variable (surgical failure), defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following events: major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3), blood loss ≥500 mL, incomplete cytoreduction. Three learning phases were thus derived from the RA-CUSUM analysis, and were compared in terms of perioperative outcomes. Results: CUSUM-OT showed that the operation time improved significantly after the 161th case. RA-CUSUM analysis allowed to break the CRS learning curve into three different phases: phase 1, "the learning phase" (cases 1-99), phase 2 "the experienced phase" (cases 100-188), and phase 3, "the mastership phase" (cases 189-251). The rate of major postoperative complications decreased significantly over the three phases (p = 0.019). Operative time decreased significantly as well (p = 0.031) and was significantly shorter in phase 3 with respect to the other two phases (phase 3 vs phase 2: 420 min vs 500 min, p = 0.017; phase 3 vs phase 1: 420 min vs 503 min, p = 0.021). Blood loss consistently decreased throughout the three phases (p = 0.001). The rate of incomplete cytoreduction was significantly lower in phase 3 than in phase 2 (4.8% vs 14.6%, p = 0.043). Conclusion: The CRS failure rate stabilized after the first 99 cases, and the complete surgical proficiency was achieved after 189 cases. A standardised and mentored learning model is a safer strategy to shorten the learning process, to reduce morbidity and mortality, to improve oncologic outcomes.

Feasibility and safety of PIPAC combined with additional surgical procedures: PLUS study.

BACKGROUND: PIPAC (Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) is a minimally invasive approach relying on physical principles for improving intraperitoneal drug delivery, including optimizing the homogeneity of drug distribution through an aerosol. Feasibility and safety of the new approach are now consolidated and data on its effectiveness are continuously increasing. Although any surgical procedure associated with PIPAC had always been discouraged due to the high risk of complications, surgical practice is constantly changing: with growing expertise, more and more surgical teams associate PIPAC with surgery. METHODS: PLUS study is part of the retrospective international cohort studies including 10 centers around the world (India, Italy, France, Germany, Belgium, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland) and 96 cases of combined approaches evaluated through a propensity score analysis. RESULTS: the procedures most frequently associated with PIPAC were not only adhesiolysis, omentectomy, adnexectomy, umbilical/inguinal hernia repairs, but also more demanding procedures such as intestinal resections, gastrectomy, splenectomy, bowel repair/stoma creation. Although the evidence is currently limited, PLUS study demonstrated that PIPAC associated with additional surgical procedures is linked to an increase of surgical time (p < 0.001), length of stay (p < 0.001) and medical complication rate (p < 0.001); the most frequently reported medical complications were mild or moderate in severity, such as abdominal pain, nausea, ileus and hyperthermia. No difference in terms of surgical complications was registered; neither reoperation or postoperative deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: these results suggest that PIPAC can be safely combined in expert centers with additional surgeries. Widespread change of practice should be discouraged before the results of ongoing prospective studies are available.

Consensus statement for treatment protocols in pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).

Objectives: Safe implementation and thorough evaluation of new treatments require prospective data monitoring and standardization of treatments. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a promising alternative for the treatment of patients with peritoneal disease with an increasing number of suggested drug regimens. The aim was to reach expert consensus on current PIPAC treatment protocols and to define the most important research topics. Methods: The expert panel included the most active PIPAC centers, organizers of PIPAC courses and principal investigators of prospective studies on PIPAC. A comprehensive literature review served as base for a two-day hybrid consensus meeting which was accompanied by a modified three-round Delphi process. Consensus bar was set at 70% for combined (strong and weak) positive or negative votes according to GRADE. Research questions were prioritized from 0 to 10 (highest importance). Results: Twenty-two out of 26 invited experts completed the entire consensus process. Consensus was reached for 10/10 final questions. The combination of doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2) and cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2) was endorsed by 20/22 experts (90.9%). 16/22 (72.7%) supported oxaliplatin at 120 with potential reduction to 90 mg/m2 (frail patients), and 77.2% suggested PIPAC-Ox in combination with 5-FU. Mitomycin-C and Nab-paclitaxel were favoured as alternative regimens. The most important research questions concerned PIPAC conditions (n=3), standard (n=4) and alternative regimens (n=5) and efficacy of PIPAC treatment (n=2); 8/14 were given a priority of ≥8/10. Conclusions: The current consensus should help to limit heterogeneity of treatment protocols but underlines the utmost importance of further research.