학술논문
Intraperitoneal chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment to prevent peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer origin: a systematic review.
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Sloothaak DA; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; Mirck B; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; Punt CJ; Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; Bemelman WA; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.; van der Bilt JD; Department of Abdominal Surgery, Gasthuisberg Hospital, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.; D'Hoore A; Department of Abdominal Surgery, Gasthuisberg Hospital, Herestraat 49, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.; Tanis PJ; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Source
Publisher: Nature Publishing Group on behalf of Cancer Research UK Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 0370635 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1532-1827 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00070920 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Br J Cancer Subsets: MEDLINE
Subject
Language
English
Abstract
Background: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectal cancer (CRC) origin is associated with poor outcome. This systematic review evaluates the available evidence about adjuvant (hyperthermic) intraperitoneal chemotherapy ((H)IPEC) to prevent the development of PC.
Methods: A systematic search of literature was conducted in August 2013 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database for studies on (H)IPEC to prevent PC in patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC.
Results: Seven comparative studies and five cohort studies were selected. Treatment schedules varied between repeated fluoropyrimidine-based IPEC administration in the ambulatory setting to intra-operative (H)IPEC procedures using mitomycin-C or oxaliplatin. The reported rates of major complications related to adjuvant (H)IPEC was low. Four out of five evaluable comparative studies reported a significant difference in the incidence of PC in favour of (H)IPEC. All three comparative studies reporting on survival after intra-operative (H)IPEC showed a significant survival benefit in favour of the experimental arm. Substantial heterogeneity in patient selection, treatment protocols, and treatment effect evaluation among studies was observed.
Conclusions: The currently available evidence about adjuvant (H)IPEC in high-risk CRC is limited and subject to bias, but points towards improved oncological outcome and supports further randomised studies.
Methods: A systematic search of literature was conducted in August 2013 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database for studies on (H)IPEC to prevent PC in patients who underwent curative surgery for primary CRC.
Results: Seven comparative studies and five cohort studies were selected. Treatment schedules varied between repeated fluoropyrimidine-based IPEC administration in the ambulatory setting to intra-operative (H)IPEC procedures using mitomycin-C or oxaliplatin. The reported rates of major complications related to adjuvant (H)IPEC was low. Four out of five evaluable comparative studies reported a significant difference in the incidence of PC in favour of (H)IPEC. All three comparative studies reporting on survival after intra-operative (H)IPEC showed a significant survival benefit in favour of the experimental arm. Substantial heterogeneity in patient selection, treatment protocols, and treatment effect evaluation among studies was observed.
Conclusions: The currently available evidence about adjuvant (H)IPEC in high-risk CRC is limited and subject to bias, but points towards improved oncological outcome and supports further randomised studies.