Global approach to hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: indication and outcome of intra-arterial chemotherapy and other hepatic-directed treatments.

Liver metastases of colorectal cancer is present in more than 20% of new diagnosed patients and in 40-60% of relapsed patients. It is a life-threatening prognostic aspect. Hepatic resection, when possible, is the best therapeutic modality, although the overall survival rate is still low (30%). Angiography and intraoperative ultrasonography are useful for resection. The number of hepatic metastases and the surgical margin are probably the most significant prognostic factors. Colorectal cancer may spread predominantly to the liver making regional treatment strategies viable options. Subtotal hepatic resections and segmentectomies are potentially curable procedures for single or small numbers of hepatic metastases without other sites of disease. However, there have been no prospective randomized trials comparing patients with unresected liver metastases and resected metastases. Regional chemotherapy with floxuridine seems usefull combined with hepatic resection or as palliative therapy. Gastric ulcer and biliary sclerosis are the main related toxicities. Patients with localized, unresectable hepatic metastases or concomitant bad medical condition may be candidates for radiation, percutaneous ethanol injection, cryosurgery, percutaneous radiofrequency, hypoxic flow-stop perfusions with bioreductive alkylating agents, hepatic arterial ligation, embolization and chemoembolization. These new hepatic-directed modalities of treatment are being investigated and may offer new approaches to providing palliation and prolonging survival. This review will report the possibilities of intra-arterial chemotherapy and other novel hepatic-directed approaches to the treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors following peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue after high-dose chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer: a prospective study.

The use of high-dose chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic rescue is increasing worldwide for solid tumors. Several studies have suggested that the period of absolute neutrophil count (ANC, < 500/ml) may be shortened in patients who receive peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC). To estimate the clinical value of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor, we examined a cohort of 26 consecutive patients with advanced breast cancer who received one or two cycles of high-dose chemotherapy with PBPC rescue with or without filgrastim. Thirty-five courses of high-dose ICE (ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide) chemotherapy were administered and evaluated. All patients received PBPC rescue. Sixteen patients (21 courses) received subcutaneous filgrastim (5 mg/kg) following PBPC infusion. Recovery to > or = 500 ANC occurred at a median time of 7 days post PBPC infusion among patients who received filgrastim versus 10 days among patients who received standard support care only (P < 0.01). The administration of filgrastim was not associated with a reduction in the duration of hospitalization, in the total number of days on nonprophylactic antibiotics, number of red blood cell transfusions, time to platelet engraftment, or number of febrile days. This could be the consequence of the high hematopoietic cell dose administered in the study. Therefore, any effect of filgrastim was probably masked by the use of a large number of PBPC. Larger prospective randomized studies, specifically focused on the utility of the administration of growth factors following high-dose chemotherapy and PBPC rescue, may be warranted to know whether the administration of filgrastim after PBPC transplantation is really necessary.