Nazim Benzerdjeb1,2, Emeline Durieux1, Juliet Tantot1, Sylvie Isaac1, Juliette Fontaine1, Olivier Harou1, Olivier Glehen2,3, Vahan Kepenekian2,3, Mohammad Alyami4, Laurent Villeneuve2,5, Nathalie Laplace2,3, Alexandra Traverse-Glehen1,6, Mojgan Shisheboran-Devouassoux1,7, Naoual Bakrin2,3. 1. Laboratoire d'Anatomie et Cytologie Pathologiques, Institut de Pathologie Multisite, Centre de Biologie Sud, Centre Hospitalier Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pierre-Bénite, France. 2. EMR 3738, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France. 3. Département de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pierre-Bénite, France. 4. King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 5. Service d'Epidémiologie et de Recherche Cliniques, Pôle de Santé Publique, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France. 6. INSERM 1052, CNRS 5286, Lyon-Sud Charles Mérieux Lyon-1 Faculty, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France. 7. INSERM 1052, CNRS 5286 Cancer Research Center of Lyon, Equipe labellisée Ligue contre le Cancer, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Abstract
AIMS: The peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) and peritoneal cytology (PC) assess response to chemotherapy in peritoneal metastasis (PM) in a setting of palliative treatment by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Progression has been defined as an increase of PRGS between first and third PIPAC procedures (iPRGS). iPRGSand positive peritoneal cytology were not associated with prognostic impact. These results may be explained by a lack of statistical power. Also, it is not known whether the mean or the highest PRGS among taken peritoneal biopsies bears the highest clinical value. We therefore conducted the largest prospective study to investigate the prognostic impact of PGRS, PC, and their combination, designated as combined progression index (CPI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with PM who underwent >3 PIPAC (n = 112) between December 2016 and February 2019 were prospectively included. A significant difference in OS and PFS according to CPI (used highest value of PRGS) was found (OS: CPI-, 83.3, 95% CI [49.8; NA] vs. CPI+, 48.1, 95% CI [38.5; 66.4] months; and PFS (respectively, 59.7, 95% CI [43.0; 96.0] vs. 33.7, 95% CI [30.4; 44.2] months). PRGS or PC had no independent prognostic impact. CPI+ was an independent predictor of worse prognosis, in OS (HR = 5.24, 95% CI [2.07; 13.26]), and PFS (HR = 4.41, 95% CI [1.40; 13.88]). CONCLUSIONS: The CPI based on highest PRGS and PC was found to be independently associated with a worse prognosis for OS and for PFS in the setting of peritoneal metastasis. These results indicate that it should be of interest to systematically take peritoneal fluid for cytological examination and to implement the CPI in the therapeutic decision-making process in the context of PIPAC.
AIMS: The peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) and peritoneal cytology (PC) assess response to chemotherapy in peritoneal metastasis (PM) in a setting of palliative treatment by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Progression has been defined as an increase of PRGS between first and third PIPAC procedures (iPRGS). iPRGSand positive peritoneal cytology were not associated with prognostic impact. These results may be explained by a lack of statistical power. Also, it is not known whether the mean or the highest PRGS among taken peritoneal biopsies bears the highest clinical value. We therefore conducted the largest prospective study to investigate the prognostic impact of PGRS, PC, and their combination, designated as combined progression index (CPI). METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients with PM who underwent >3 PIPAC (n = 112) between December 2016 and February 2019 were prospectively included. A significant difference in OS and PFS according to CPI (used highest value of PRGS) was found (OS: CPI-, 83.3, 95% CI [49.8; NA] vs. CPI+, 48.1, 95% CI [38.5; 66.4] months; and PFS (respectively, 59.7, 95% CI [43.0; 96.0] vs. 33.7, 95% CI [30.4; 44.2] months). PRGS or PC had no independent prognostic impact. CPI+ was an independent predictor of worse prognosis, in OS (HR = 5.24, 95% CI [2.07; 13.26]), and PFS (HR = 4.41, 95% CI [1.40; 13.88]). CONCLUSIONS: The CPI based on highest PRGS and PC was found to be independently associated with a worse prognosis for OS and for PFS in the setting of peritoneal metastasis. These results indicate that it should be of interest to systematically take peritoneal fluid for cytological examination and to implement the CPI in the therapeutic decision-making process in the context of PIPAC.
Authors: Koen P Rovers; Emma C E Wassenaar; Robin J Lurvink; Geert-Jan M Creemers; Jacobus W A Burger; Maartje Los; Clément J R Huysentruyt; Gesina van Lijnschoten; Joost Nederend; Max J Lahaye; Maarten J Deenen; Marinus J Wiezer; Simon W Nienhuijs; Djamila Boerma; Ignace H J T de Hingh Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Robin J Lurvink; Koen P Rovers; Simon W Nienhuijs; Geert-Jan Creemers; Jacobus W A Burger; Ignace H J de Hingh Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2021-04
Authors: Rémy Sindayigaya; Can Dogan; Cédric Remy Demtröder; Britta Fischer; Elias Karam; Jonathan Robin Buggisch; Clemens B Tempfer; Thierry Lecomte; Mehdi Ouaissi; Urs Giger-Pabst Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Laura Toussaint; Hugo Teixeira Farinha; Jean-Luc Barras; Nicolas Demartines; Christine Sempoux; Martin Hübner Journal: Pleura Peritoneum Date: 2021-07-15
Authors: Mojib Fallah; Sönke Detlefsen; Alan P Ainsworth; Claus W Fristrup; Michael B Mortensen; Per Pfeiffer; Line S Tarpgaard; Martin Graversen Journal: Pleura Peritoneum Date: 2022-05-30
Authors: A Taibi; M-L Perrin; J Albouys; J Jacques; C Yardin; S Durand-Fontanier; S M Bardet Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2021-03-07 Impact factor: 3.405