Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy with one minute of electrostatic precipitation (ePIPAC) is feasible, but the histological tumor response in peritoneal metastasis is insufficient

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Introduction: Electrostatic precipitation Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has shown superior penetration depth and tissue uptake compared to standard PIPAC. We investigated the feasibility and objective tumor response to ePIPAC with 1 min of precipitation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Materials and methods: Patients with PM from various abdominal cancers were included in an amendment to the ongoing prospective PIPAC-OPC2 trial. Colorectal and appendiceal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with PM from other primaries were treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three ePIPAC procedures were planned in each patient including repeated peritoneal biopsies for response evaluation. After emission to the peritoneal cavity, the aerosolized chemotherapeutics were precipitated for 1 min followed by immediate exsufflation and abdominal closure. Histological regression from the first to the third ePIPAC was evaluated according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and compared to data from the PIPAC-OPC1 trial. Complications and toxicities were recorded according to Dindo-Clavien and CTCAE. Results: Sixty-five ePIPAC procedures were performed in 33 patients (median 2, range 1–6). Ten patients were eligible for response evaluation based on biopsies from the first and third ePIPAC procedure. Four patients had disease progression, four patients had regressive disease, and two patients had stable disease according to PRGS. No life threatening adverse reactions and no mortality was observed following ePIPAC. Conclusion: One minute ePIPAC was feasible and safe, but the histological tumor response was insufficient compared to standard PIPAC directed therapy with 30 min passive diffusion time.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftEuropean Journal of Surgical Oncology
ISSN0748-7983
DOI
StatusE-pub ahead of print - 29. aug. 2019

Fingeraftryk

Static Electricity
Neoplasms
oxaliplatin
Peritoneal Cavity
Cisplatin

Citer dette

@article{2242eee3371f49f3bd55957c583faff4,
title = "Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy with one minute of electrostatic precipitation (ePIPAC) is feasible, but the histological tumor response in peritoneal metastasis is insufficient",
abstract = "Introduction: Electrostatic precipitation Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has shown superior penetration depth and tissue uptake compared to standard PIPAC. We investigated the feasibility and objective tumor response to ePIPAC with 1 min of precipitation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Materials and methods: Patients with PM from various abdominal cancers were included in an amendment to the ongoing prospective PIPAC-OPC2 trial. Colorectal and appendiceal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with PM from other primaries were treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three ePIPAC procedures were planned in each patient including repeated peritoneal biopsies for response evaluation. After emission to the peritoneal cavity, the aerosolized chemotherapeutics were precipitated for 1 min followed by immediate exsufflation and abdominal closure. Histological regression from the first to the third ePIPAC was evaluated according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and compared to data from the PIPAC-OPC1 trial. Complications and toxicities were recorded according to Dindo-Clavien and CTCAE. Results: Sixty-five ePIPAC procedures were performed in 33 patients (median 2, range 1–6). Ten patients were eligible for response evaluation based on biopsies from the first and third ePIPAC procedure. Four patients had disease progression, four patients had regressive disease, and two patients had stable disease according to PRGS. No life threatening adverse reactions and no mortality was observed following ePIPAC. Conclusion: One minute ePIPAC was feasible and safe, but the histological tumor response was insufficient compared to standard PIPAC directed therapy with 30 min passive diffusion time.",
keywords = "ePIPAC, Feasibility, Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, Peritoneal metastasis, PIPAC, Tumor response",
author = "Martin Graversen and S{\"o}nke Detlefsen and Ellebaek, {Signe Bremholm} and Claus Fristrup and Per Pfeiffer and Mortensen, {Michael B.}",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "29",
doi = "10.1016/j.ejso.2019.08.024",
language = "English",
journal = "European Journal of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "0748-7983",
publisher = "Heinemann",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy with one minute of electrostatic precipitation (ePIPAC) is feasible, but the histological tumor response in peritoneal metastasis is insufficient

AU - Graversen, Martin

AU - Detlefsen, Sönke

AU - Ellebaek, Signe Bremholm

AU - Fristrup, Claus

AU - Pfeiffer, Per

AU - Mortensen, Michael B.

PY - 2019/8/29

Y1 - 2019/8/29

N2 - Introduction: Electrostatic precipitation Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has shown superior penetration depth and tissue uptake compared to standard PIPAC. We investigated the feasibility and objective tumor response to ePIPAC with 1 min of precipitation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Materials and methods: Patients with PM from various abdominal cancers were included in an amendment to the ongoing prospective PIPAC-OPC2 trial. Colorectal and appendiceal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with PM from other primaries were treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three ePIPAC procedures were planned in each patient including repeated peritoneal biopsies for response evaluation. After emission to the peritoneal cavity, the aerosolized chemotherapeutics were precipitated for 1 min followed by immediate exsufflation and abdominal closure. Histological regression from the first to the third ePIPAC was evaluated according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and compared to data from the PIPAC-OPC1 trial. Complications and toxicities were recorded according to Dindo-Clavien and CTCAE. Results: Sixty-five ePIPAC procedures were performed in 33 patients (median 2, range 1–6). Ten patients were eligible for response evaluation based on biopsies from the first and third ePIPAC procedure. Four patients had disease progression, four patients had regressive disease, and two patients had stable disease according to PRGS. No life threatening adverse reactions and no mortality was observed following ePIPAC. Conclusion: One minute ePIPAC was feasible and safe, but the histological tumor response was insufficient compared to standard PIPAC directed therapy with 30 min passive diffusion time.

AB - Introduction: Electrostatic precipitation Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has shown superior penetration depth and tissue uptake compared to standard PIPAC. We investigated the feasibility and objective tumor response to ePIPAC with 1 min of precipitation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM). Materials and methods: Patients with PM from various abdominal cancers were included in an amendment to the ongoing prospective PIPAC-OPC2 trial. Colorectal and appendiceal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with PM from other primaries were treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three ePIPAC procedures were planned in each patient including repeated peritoneal biopsies for response evaluation. After emission to the peritoneal cavity, the aerosolized chemotherapeutics were precipitated for 1 min followed by immediate exsufflation and abdominal closure. Histological regression from the first to the third ePIPAC was evaluated according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and compared to data from the PIPAC-OPC1 trial. Complications and toxicities were recorded according to Dindo-Clavien and CTCAE. Results: Sixty-five ePIPAC procedures were performed in 33 patients (median 2, range 1–6). Ten patients were eligible for response evaluation based on biopsies from the first and third ePIPAC procedure. Four patients had disease progression, four patients had regressive disease, and two patients had stable disease according to PRGS. No life threatening adverse reactions and no mortality was observed following ePIPAC. Conclusion: One minute ePIPAC was feasible and safe, but the histological tumor response was insufficient compared to standard PIPAC directed therapy with 30 min passive diffusion time.

KW - ePIPAC

KW - Feasibility

KW - Intraperitoneal chemotherapy

KW - Peritoneal metastasis

KW - PIPAC

KW - Tumor response

U2 - 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.08.024

DO - 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.08.024

M3 - Journal article

JO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology

JF - European Journal of Surgical Oncology

SN - 0748-7983

ER -