Neoadjuvant treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination

Introduction

In all studies that address the treatment of carcinomatosis for gastric cancer, complete cytoreduction is a requirement for prolonged survival in the management of this condition.1–12 For gastric cancer the proportion of patients who receive a complete cytoreduction is small; even in selected patients less than one-third of patients have resection of all visible cancer.78 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been proposed as a treatment modality that would increase the proportion of gastric cancer patients with peritoneal seeding who could receive a complete clearing of the cancer.1213 Unfortunately, systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy has never significantly downstaged peritoneal seeding and the presence of carcinomatosis is considered by many a contraindication to the neoadjuvant treatment strategy.#

Add commentAdd assertion

We report a new neoadjuvant treatment modality for gastric cancer with peritoneal seeding; it combines intraperitoneal with systemic chemotherapy in an attempt to eradicate disease on visceral peritoneal surfaces and thereby increase the proportion of patients who may receive complete cytoreduction. It is an attempt to eradicate cancer nodules by multimodality chemotherapy that would enter the cancer nodule from the systemic circulation but also diffuse into the nodule from a chemotherapy solution in the peritoneal cavity. A prospective phase II study was initiated to demonstrate the efficacy of this treatment in the palliation of patients with gastric cancer and carcinomatosis and further explore its toxicities.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Patients and methods

Patients

Patients were enrolled between April, 2001 and December, 2003. PC was diagnosed by biopsy using laparotomy, laparoscopy, or by the cytologic examination of ascites. The eligibility criteria included: (1) histologically or cytologically proven PC from gastric adenocarcinoma; (2) absence of hematogenous metastasis and remote lymph node metastasis; (3) age 65years or younger; (4) Eastern Clinical Oncology Group scale of performance status 2 or less; (5) adequate bone marrow, liver, cardiac, and renal function; and (6) absence of other severe medical conditions or synchronous malignancy.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Informed consent according to the institutional guideline was obtained from all patients.#

Add commentAdd assertion

After the cytological or histological diagnosis of peritoneal dissemination, a peritoneal port system (Bard Port, C.R. Bard Inc., USA) was introduced into the abdominal cavity under local anesthesia, and the tip was placed on the cul-de-sac of Douglas.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Chemotherapy

For intraperitoneal chemotherapy, 40mg of taxotere and 150mg of carboplatin were introduced over 30min in 1000ml of saline. On the same day, 100mg /m2 of methotrexate and 600mg/m2 of 5-fluorouracil were infused in 100ml of saline over 15min via a peripheral vein. This regimen was repeated weekly for two courses. Before and after NIPS, 500ml of saline was injected into the peritoneal cavity through the port, and fluid was recovered for cytology. In patients with positive cytology before NIPS, peritoneal wash cytology was performed after two courses of NIPS. If the result showed positive cytology, NIPS was added for the other two courses. Then, the test was repeated after four courses of NIPS, and NIPS continued again in the cases of positive results for peritoneal wash cytology.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Investigation

In the patients with negative cytology before NIPS, endoscopy and CT scan were performed after two courses of NIPS. If no effect was observed on the tumors, patients additionally received two or more courses of NIPS. The number of NIPS chemotherapy treatments depends on the effect on tumors or the status of peritoneal cytology after NIPS, because preoperative cytoreduction by NIPS against PC widely spread in the peritoneal cavity is an indispensable procedure for the complete cytoreduction of PC.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Staging

The peritoneal stage was determined from The Japanese General Rules for Gastric Cancer Study: metastasis to the adjacent peritoneum (P1), a few metastases to distant peritoneal sites (P2), and numerous metastases to the distant peritoneum (P3).14 Also, the distributions and sizes of peritoneal metastases were recorded at all laparoscopic or surgical interventions. Effects of NIPS were evaluated by comparing the size and number of PC before and after NIPS. In the non-operable patients, the effects of NIPS were evaluated by laparoscopy, or CT scan.#

Add commentAdd assertion

If the peritoneal wash cytology revealed negative study or the tumors showed partial response after NIPS, laparotomy was done to perform peritonectomy procedure. Patients showing progressive disease did not undergo laparotomy, and patients with positive cytology even after four or six courses of NIPS were treated with chemotherapy.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Techniques

The technique used to remove peritoneal dissemination was the peritonectomy procedure developed by Sugarbaker and Yonemura.45 For the complete removal of visceral peritoneum bearing cancer, total gastrectomy, subtotal colectomy and partial resection of the small intestine were performed. If the mesentery of the small bowel was affected, nodules were removed without resection of the small bowel.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Peritoneum covering the diaphragm was removed by electrosurgical dissection between the peritoneum and the diaphragmatic muscle. If necessary the entire peritoneum covering both the right and left hemidiaphragm was removed. Pelvic peritonectomy was completed by stripping the pelvic peritoneum covering the bladder; the cul-de-sac was completely removed with the rectosigmoid colon. An ileosigmoid anastomosis or permanent ileostomy was performed. In females, the uterus was removed with the pelvic peritoneum combined with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The goal of peritonectomy was the complete removal of all visible cancer nodules.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Complications were prospectively identified and verified by a chart review. All complications related to NIPS chemotherapy and peritonectomy were recorded.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Outcome data were obtained from medical records and patient interview. Statistical analyses were performed by using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA). Survival curves are calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Results

Clinical characteristics of the 61 patients are listed in Table 1. The average age was 45.6years. All 61 patients had P3 dissemination. Ascites was present in 33 patients. Twenty-eight patients had primary gastric cancer and the remaining 33 patients had recurrent PC.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Prior to NIPS chemotherapy, peritoneal fluid cytology was positive in 39 patients and reverted to negative cytology after treatment in 22. In 33 patients with ascites, all peritoneal fluid disappeared in 12 patients after NIPS chemotherapy. Thirty-eight patients showed partial response after NIPS (Table 2). After NIPS chemotherapy, 30 patients had an operative intervention, and the other 31 patients did not undergo surgery due to the progression of disease (N=19) and refusal of operation (N=12). P3 status changed to be P2 in 2 patients.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Table 3 indicates the operation interventions. Total gastrectomy was performed in 20 primary cases, subtotal colectomy in 21, total hysterectomy in combination with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in 13, resection of small bowel in 13 and resection of small bowel mesentery in 14. Left and right subdiaphragmatic peritonectomy was performed in 15 and 13 patients. Pelvic peritonectomy was performed in 17 patients. Fulguration of peritoneal nodules was used as an adjunctive surgical technique in 23 patients. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 14 (50%) of 30 patients. In 32 patients with recurrent cancer, complete cytoreduction was performed in only one patient (3.1%), and 11 patients received incomplete cytoreduction. On the contrary, complete cytoreduction was done in 13 (46%) of 28 primary cases.#

Add commentAdd assertion

In all patients, bone marrow suppression of grade 3 or 4 was recorded in 6 patients and diarrhea in 2 patients, respectively. Bone marrow suppression developed after 3 courses in three, 5 courses in two and 6 courses in one patient.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Complications developed in 7 patients after cytoreductive surgery with peritonectomy. Pneumonia developed in 2 patients and renal failure occurred in one patient. There were 2 instances of anastomotic leakage, and 2 of abdominal abscess. The overall operative mortality rate was 3.3% (1/30), and the cause of death was multiple organ failure due to sepsis from abdominal abscess.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Twenty-six patients were alive at the time of analysis. The survival distribution for all patients is shown in Fig. 1. Median survival time (MST) of all patients was 14.4months, with a 1-year survival of 67%. MST of the 30 patients who had surgical intervention was 18.0months, and that of patients who did not receive the operation was 9.6months (Fig. 2). There was a significant survival difference between the two groups (P=0.031, Z=4.64). Patients who received a complete resection had a median survival of 20.4months, and survival of patients who received incomplete cytoreduction was 15months (Fig. 2).#

Add commentAdd assertion

There was no survival difference between primary and recurrent cases. MSTs of primary and recurrent cases after cytoreduction were 14.4 and 15.6months, and those after no operation cases were 9.6 and 8.4 months, respectively.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Discussion

Chemotherapy for PC

In the treatment of cancer arising from gastrointestinal tract, PC has long been considered as a fatal disease, and most surgeons have considered PC as a non-surgical condition. Recently, some investigators have reported limited success with new treatment strategies which include intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia, early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy and peritonectomy.3–9 These studies suggest that intraperitoneal chemotherapy can deliver a high dose intensity into the peritoneal cavity. Unfortunately, drug penetration deep to the peritoneal surface is limited. Effective diffusion distance into tissues is reported to range from 100μm to 1000μm.1516 Accordingly, any superiority of intraperitoneal chemotherapy over intravenous delivery in PC will be limited to those patients with very small tumor volumes at the time when regional treatment is initiated. Hyperthermia augmented the penetration distance of anticancer drugs up to 2000μm.16 Furthermore, hyperthermia also alters permeability of tumor cell membranes to enhance uptake of chemotherapeutic drugs.17 In addition, hyperthermia shows a synergistic cytotoxicity on cancer cells when combined with chemotherapeutic drugs such as Mitomycin C, Etoposide and CDDP.18 However, intraperitoneal hyperthermia combined with chemotherapy is effective only for prophylaxis of peritoneal recurrence and small nodular type of established PC.19 Accordingly, peritoneal nodules larger than 2mm cannot be eradicated by IP chemotherapy and hyperthermia.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Surgical treatment for PC

In the surgical treatment of PC from appendiceal and colon cancer, complete cytoreduction has been determined to be essential for long-term survival. Culliford et al. reported a 5-year survival of 54% for complete cytoreduction and 15% for incomplete cytoreduction.20 Furthermore, Glehen et al. reported that the 2-year survival rate was 79% for patients with macroscopic complete resection and 44.7% for patients without macroscopic incomplete cytoreduction.9 In PC from gastric cancer, Yonemura et al. reported that patients receiving complete cytoreduction had a significantly higher survival than did those with residual disease.19 Although great differences exist in the biological behavior of colon and gastric cancer, macroscopic complete cytoreduction may be the most important surgical requirement in the treatment of PC with a goal of long-term survival in both conditions. Unfortunately, complete cytoreduction is not possible in P3 dissemination even with the most aggressive peritonectomy. Complete cytoreduction cannot be achieved when small bowel and its mesentery are diffusely involved.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Development of NIPS

To increase the rate of complete cytoreduction by clearing the peritoneum of cancer nodules, NIPS chemotherapy was developed. The present study indicates that NIPS can increase the rate of complete cytoreduction as a result of a reduction of distribution and volume of peritoneal cancer nodules.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Furthermore, NIPS chemotherapy was able to eradicate free cancer cells in the peritoneal cavity prior to the operation. Free intraperitoneal cancer cells can be detected in 65% of patients with peritoneal dissemination. 21 These cells are viable and may be trapped with the peritoneal wound created by the surgical procedure. Accordingly, the free cancer cells should be eradicated before peritonectomy.#

Add commentAdd assertion

In vitro chemosensitivity testing is considered a fairy good predictor of clinical chemosensitivity.2223 Tanaka et al. shows results of such testing in clinically obtained samples from primary gastric cancer, using a collagen gel method.23 Carboplatin, taxotere, 5-fluorouracil, CDDP, and Mitomycin C show high chemosensitivity for gastric cancer. From these results, taxotere, carboplatin, and 5-fluorouracil had been selected for NIPS, and methotrexate was used as a biochemical modulator of 5-fluorouracil.24#

Add commentAdd assertion

According to Cunliffe,25 for intraabdominal metastasis, nutrition can be derived from the peritoneal surface as well as the blood supply.26 In NIPS, the peritoneal cancer nodule is penetrated bidirectionally, not only through intraperitoneal but also intravenous therapy. Generally, intravenous chemotherapy has little effect on PC.1213 Intraperitoneal chemotherapy alone showed a response rate of less than 30%.727–29 The present study showed a response rate of 65% after NIPS chemotherapy.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Toxicity and survival after NIPS

From the study of the dose limiting toxicities of IP administration of taxorete, Morgan et al. reported that maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 125mg/m2, and that no grade 3 or 4 toxicities were found after the i.p. administration of lower than a dose of 80mg/m2.28 Furthermore, Fusida et al. reported that there was no hematological toxicities after weekly i.p. administration of 45mg/m2 of taxotere.29#

Add commentAdd assertion

In the i.p. administration of carboplatin, MTD was determined to be 500mg/m2,30 and 300mg/m2 of i.p. administration of carboplatin was a safe dose in Japanese patients with ovarian cancer.31#

Add commentAdd assertion

The doses of 40mg/m2 of taxotere and 150mg/m2 of carboplatin which were used in the present study were considered to be safe doses.#

Add commentAdd assertion

This combined approach of systemic and intraperitoneal chemotherapy was associated with an absent mortality and a very reasonable morbidity. Also, it was effective for ascites. This combination of systemic and local-regional chemotherapy should be considered in patients with carcinomatosis from gastric cancer. It may be even more effective for those patients who have small volumes of disease and symptomatic ascites. Accordingly, the bidirectional chemotherapy may be the preferred strategy for the preoperative chemotherapy of PC and should be considered for phase III studies.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Despite the extensive chemotherapeutic and surgical interventions the patients who were able to complete the protocol had an acceptable quality of life, and survival improvement.#

Add commentAdd assertion

Figures and Tables

Figure 1
Overall survival of 51 patients with P3 peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer treated with neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS).
Add commentAdd assertion
Figure 2
Survival curves of patients in terms of completeness of cytoreduction.
Add commentAdd assertion

Table 1

Patients' characteristics
Age 45.6±14.4 (range 18–69)
Gender
Male 28
Female 33
Grade of dissemination
P1 0
P2 0
P3 61
Ascites
No 28
Yes 33
Peritoneal lavage cytology
Negative 22
Positive 39
Primary or recurrence
Primary 28
Recurrence 33
Cycles of NIPS 3.8 (2–6)
Total 61

Table 2

a

PD, progressive disease.
Effect of peritoneal dissemination after NIPS
Surgical exploration No operation Total (%)
No change or PDa 4 19 23 (38)
Partial response 26 12 38 (62)
Complete response 0 0 0
30 21 61

Table 3

Operative interventions after NIPS chemotherapy
No operation 31
Complete resection 14
Incomplete resection 16
Operation methods (24 patients)
Total gastrectomy 20
Subtotal colectomy 21
Total hysterectomy/bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy 13
Small bowel resection 13
Resection of small bowel mesentery 14
Left subdiaphragmatic peritonectomy 15
Right subdiaphragmatic peritonectomy 13
Pelvic peritonectomy 17
Electrosurgical fulguration 23

References

1. D.Z.J.ChuN.P.LangC.ThompsonP.K.OsteenK.C.WestbrookPeritoneal carcinomatosis in nongynecologic malignancy. A prospective study of prognostic factorsCancer631989364367

Add commentAdd assertion

2. B.SadeghiC.ArvieuxO.GlehenA.C.BeaujardM.RivoireJ.BaulieuxPeritoneal carcinomatosis from non gynecologic malignancies: results of the EVOCAPE a multicentric prospective studyCancer882000358363

Add commentAdd assertion

3. P.H.SugarbakerW.YuY.YonemuraGastrectomy, peritonectomy and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: the evolution of treatment strategies for advanced gastric cancerSemin Surg Oncol212003233248

Add commentAdd assertion

4. P.H.SugarbakerPeritonectomy proceduresAnn Surg2119952942

Add commentAdd assertion

5. Y.YonemuraT.FujimuraS.FushidaH.FujitaE.BandoK.TaniguchiPeritonectomy as a treatment modality for patients with peritoneal dissemination from gastric cancerT.NakashimaT.YamaguchiMultimodality therapy for gastric cancer1999Springer-VerlagTokyo7180

Add commentAdd assertion

6. Y.YonemuraE.BandouK.KinoshitaT.KawamuraS.TakahashiY.EndouEffective therapy for peritoneal dissemination in gastric cancerSurg Oncol Clin N Am122003635648

Add commentAdd assertion

7. Y.YonemuraT.FujimuraS.FushidaS.TakegawaT.KamataK.KatayamaHyperthermo-chemotherapy combined with cytoreductive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal disseminationWorld J Surg151991530536

Add commentAdd assertion

8. K.HiroseK.KatayamaA.IidaA.YamaguchiG.NakagawaraS.UmedaEfficacy of continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion for the prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal metastasis of advanced gastric cancerOncology571999106114

Add commentAdd assertion

9. O.GlehenF.MithieuxD.OsinskyA.C.BeaujardG.FreyerP.GuertschSurgery combined with peritonectomy procedures and intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia in abdominal cancers with peritoneal carcinomatosis: A phase II studyJ Clin Oncol212003799806

Add commentAdd assertion

10. P.H.SugarbakerResults of treatment of 385 patients with peritoneal surface spread of appendiceal malignancyAnn Surg Oncol681999727731

Add commentAdd assertion

11. Glehen O, Kwiatkowski F, Sugarbaker PH, et al. Patient registry of combined treatment for colorectal carcinomatosis. J Clin Oncol, in press.

Add commentAdd assertion

12. H.WilkeP.PreusserU.FinkU.GunzerH.J.MeyerJ.MeyerPreoperative chemotherapy in locally advanced and nonresectable gastric cancer: a phase II study with etoposide, doxorubicin, and cisplatinJ Clin Oncol7198913181326

Add commentAdd assertion

13. J.A.AjaniD.M.OtaJ.M.JessupF.C.AmesC.McBrideA.BoddieResectable gastric carcinoma: an evaluation of preoperative and postoperative chemotherapyCancer68199115011506

Add commentAdd assertion

14. Japanese Research Society for Gastric CancerThe general rules for gastric cancer study1st English ed.1995Kanehara ShuppanTokyo

Add commentAdd assertion

15. G.LosP.H.A.MutsaersW.J.F.van der VijghG.S.BaldewP.W.de GraafJ.G.McVieDirect diffusion of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum (II) in intraperitoneal rat tumors after intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a comparison with systemic chemotherapyCancer Res49198933803384

Add commentAdd assertion

16. G.LosM.J.H.van VugtH.M.PinedoResponse of peritoneal solid tumors after intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia treatment with cisplatin and carboplatinBr J Cancer681994235241

Add commentAdd assertion

17. G.C.LiE.C.ShinG.M.HahnSimilarities in cellular inactivation by hyperthermia or by ethanolRadiat Res821980257268

Add commentAdd assertion

18. Y.YonemuraHyperthermo-chemotherapy for treatment of peritoneal disseminationY.YonemuraPeritoneal dissemination1998Maeda ShotenKanazawa237260

Add commentAdd assertion

19. Y.YonemuraX.de AretxabalaT.FujimuraS.FushidaK.KatayamaE.BandouIntraoperative chemo-hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion as an adjuvant to gastric cancer: final results of a randomized controlled studyHepato-Gastroenterology48200117761782

Add commentAdd assertion

20. A.T.CullifordA.D.BrooksS.SharmaL.B.SaltzG.K.SchwartzE.M.O'ReillySurgical debulking and intraperitoneal chemotherapy for established peritoneal metastases from colon and appendix cancerAnn Surg Oncol82001787795

Add commentAdd assertion

21. E.BandouY.YonemuraY.TakeshitaK.TaniguchiT.YasuiY.YoshimitsuIntraoperative lavage for cytological examination in 1,297 patients with gastric carcinomaAm J Surg1781999256262

Add commentAdd assertion

22. T.KubotaN.SasanoO.AbeI.NakaoE.KawamuraT.SaitoPotential of the histoculture drug-response assay to contribute to cancer patient survivalClin Cancer Res1199515371543

Add commentAdd assertion

23. M.TanakaT.ObataT.SasakiEvaluation of antitumor effects of docetaxel (Taxotere®) on human gastric cancers in vitro and in vivoEur J Cancer321996226230

Add commentAdd assertion

24. E.M.NewmanY.LuM.Kashani-SabetV.KesavanK.J.ScanlonMechanisms of cross-resistance to methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil in an A2780 human ovarian carcinoma cell subline resistant to cisplatinBiochem Pharmacol371988443447

Add commentAdd assertion

25. W.J.CunliffeThe rationale for early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancerP.SugarbakerManagement of gastric cancer1991KluwerBoston143157

Add commentAdd assertion

26. F.N.GillyP.Y.CarryA.C.SayageRegional chemotherapy (with mitomycin C) and intraoperative chemohyperthermia for digestive cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosisHepato-gastroenterology411994124129

Add commentAdd assertion

27. S.FujimotoM.TakahashiK.KobayashiM.KureT.MutouH.MasaokaRelation between clinical and histologic outcome of intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion for patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastasisOncology501993338343

Add commentAdd assertion

28. R.J.MorganJ.H.DoroshowT.SynoldD.LimS.ShibataK.MargolinPhase I trial of intraperitoneal Docetaxel in the treatment of advanced malignancies primarily confined to the peritoneal cavity: dose-limiting toxicity and pharmacologyClin Cancer Res9200358965901

Add commentAdd assertion

29. S.FusidaN.FuruiS.KinamiI.NinomiyaT.FujimuraG.NishimuraPharamacologic study of intraperitoneal Docetaxel in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal disseminationJpn J Cancer Chemother29200217591763

Add commentAdd assertion

30. H.MalmstromD.LarssonE.SimonsenPhase I study of intraperitoneal carboplatin as adjuvant therapy in early ovarian cancerGynecol Oncol391990289294

Add commentAdd assertion

31. M.OhnoM.HirokawaT.HandoPharmacokinetics of carboplatin after intraperitoneal administration and clinical effect in ovarian cancerJpn J Cancer Chemother19199223552361

Add commentAdd assertion
Display comments
About this application
Developed by 67 Bricks Ltd.