R C Auer1, D Sivajohanathan2, J Biagi3, J Conner4, E Kennedy5, T May6. 1. Departments of Surgery and of Biochemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON. 2. Department of Oncology, McMaster University, and Program in Evidence-Based Care, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Hamilton, ON. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, ON. 4. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON. 5. Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON. 6. Department of Oncology, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of the present review was to provide evidence-based guidance about the provision of cytoreductive surgery (crs) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (hipec) in the treatment of peritoneal cancers. Methods: The guideline was developed by the Program in Evidence-Based Care together with the Surgical Oncology Program at Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) through a systematic review of relevant literature, patient- and caregiver-specific consultation, and internal and external reviews. Results: Recommendation 1a: For patients with newly diagnosed stage iii primary epithelial ovarian or fallopian tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma, hipec should be considered for those with at least stable disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy at the time that interval crs (if complete) or optimal cytoreduction is achieved. Recommendation 1b: There is insufficient evidence to recommend the addition of hipec when primary crs is performed for patients with newly diagnosed advanced primary epithelial ovarian or fallopian tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma, outside of a clinical trial. Recommendation 2: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 3: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs in patients with peritoneal colorectal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 4: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the prevention of peritoneal carcinomatosis in colorectal cancer outside the context of a clinical trial; however, hipec using oxaliplatin is not recommended. Recommendation 5: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the treatment of gastric peritoneal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 6: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the prevention of gastric peritoneal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 7: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs as a standard of care in patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma; however, patients should be referred to hipec specialty centres for assessment for treatment as part of an ongoing research protocol. Recommendation 8: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs as a standard of care in patients with disseminated mucinous neoplasm in the appendix; however, patients should be referred to hipec specialty centres for assessment for treatment as part of an ongoing research protocol. 2020 Multimed Inc.
Objective: The purpose of the present review was to provide evidence-based guidance about the provision of cytoreductive surgery (crs) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (hipec) in the treatment of peritoneal cancers. Methods: The guideline was developed by the Program in Evidence-Based Care together with the Surgical Oncology Program at Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) through a systematic review of relevant literature, patient- and caregiver-specific consultation, and internal and external reviews. Results: Recommendation 1a: For patients with newly diagnosed stage iii primary epithelial ovarian or fallopian tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma, hipec should be considered for those with at least stable disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy at the time that interval crs (if complete) or optimal cytoreduction is achieved. Recommendation 1b: There is insufficient evidence to recommend the addition of hipec when primary crs is performed for patients with newly diagnosed advanced primary epithelial ovarian or fallopian tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma, outside of a clinical trial. Recommendation 2: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 3: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs in patients with peritoneal colorectal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 4: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the prevention of peritoneal carcinomatosis in colorectal cancer outside the context of a clinical trial; however, hipec using oxaliplatin is not recommended. Recommendation 5: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the treatment of gastric peritoneal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 6: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs for the prevention of gastric peritoneal carcinomatosis outside the context of a clinical trial. Recommendation 7: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs as a standard of care in patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma; however, patients should be referred to hipec specialty centres for assessment for treatment as part of an ongoing research protocol. Recommendation 8: There is insufficient evidence to recommend hipec with crs as a standard of care in patients with disseminated mucinous neoplasm in the appendix; however, patients should be referred to hipec specialty centres for assessment for treatment as part of an ongoing research protocol. 2020 Multimed Inc.
Authors: Irene Thomassen; Yvette R van Gestel; Bert van Ramshorst; Misha D Luyer; Koop Bosscha; Simon W Nienhuijs; Valery E Lemmens; Ignace H de Hingh Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2013-08-05 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Charlotte E L Klaver; Daniel D Wisselink; Cornelis J A Punt; Petur Snaebjornsson; Johannes Crezee; Arend G J Aalbers; Alexandra Brandt; Andre J A Bremers; Jacobus W A Burger; Hans F J Fabry; Floris Ferenschild; Sebastiaan Festen; Wilhelmina M U van Grevenstein; Patrick H J Hemmer; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Niels F M Kok; Gijsbert D Musters; Lotte Schoonderwoerd; Jurriaan B Tuynman; Anthony W H van de Ven; Henderik L van Westreenen; Marinus J Wiezer; David D E Zimmerman; Annette A van Zweeden; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Pieter J Tanis Journal: Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2019-07-29
Authors: Petrus Järvinen; Ari Ristimäki; Jonas Kantonen; Merja Aronen; Riikka Huuhtanen; Heikki Järvinen; Anna Lepistö Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: William E Winter; G Larry Maxwell; Chunqiao Tian; Jay W Carlson; Robert F Ozols; Peter G Rose; Maurie Markman; Deborah K Armstrong; Franco Muggia; William P McGuire Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Willemien J van Driel; Simone N Koole; Karolina Sikorska; Jules H Schagen van Leeuwen; Henk W R Schreuder; Ralph H M Hermans; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Jacobus van der Velden; Henriëtte J Arts; Leon F A G Massuger; Arend G J Aalbers; Victor J Verwaal; Jacobien M Kieffer; Koen K Van de Vijver; Harm van Tinteren; Neil K Aaronson; Gabe S Sonke Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David N Hanna; Muhammad O Ghani; Andrew Hermina; Alexander Mina; Christina E Bailey; Kamran Idrees; Deepa Magge Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: Rokas Račkauskas; Augustinas Baušys; Jonas Jurgaitis; Marius Paškonis; Kęstutis Strupas Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 4.964