Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Optimization of Patient Selection for Surgical Approach to Peritoneal Metastases from Gastrointestinal Cancer Using Cytoreductive Surgery and Perioperative Chemotherapy

  • Therapeutic Approaches to Metastatic Colorectal Cancers (R Salazar, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Colorectal Cancer Reports

Abstract

Gastrointestinal cancer can metastasize by hematogenous routes to the liver, by lymphatic channels to regional lymph nodes, and by penetration of the bowel wall to the peritoneal surfaces. For patients who have isolated peritoneal metastases, a new management plan with curative intent has evolved over the last 30 years. Now patients with peritoneal dissemination are evaluated by the multidisciplinary team for treatment by cytoreductive surgery plus perioperative chemotherapy. Major progress in the treatment of peritoneal metastases has occurred as a result of more clearly defined selection criteria. Now it is possible to identify patients who are likely to benefit and exclude those who may undergo extensive surgery with little or no added longevity or improved quality of life. Success with the combined treatment is dependent on complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) before initiation of the perioperative chemotherapy. The large variations in success with peritoneal metastases treatment is dependent upon the success of hyperthermic perioperative chemotherapy (HIPEC) and early postoperative chemotherapy (EPIC) to maintain the absence of intraperitoneal cancer achieved by the surgical complete response. Prevention of a recurrence of peritoneal metastases after complete cytoreduction can be divided into two distinct time periods. Secondary prevention involves the peritoneal metastases diagnosed in follow up. The selection factors important in assessment of secondary prevention include the peritoneal cancer index (PCI), histological assessment of biological aggressiveness, lymph node status, distribution of peritoneal metastases, prior surgical score (PSS), and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A new and promising investigation is prevention of peritoneal metastases as part of management of the primary malignancy. This use of CRS and HIPEC is referred to as primary prevention. The clinical features that suggest the need for CRS and perioperative chemotherapy are peritoneal nodules detected at the time of primary cancer resection, ovarian metastases, perforation through the primary cancer, adjacent structure or organ invasion, signet ring histology, fistula formation, or obstruction. The histopathologic features suggesting the need for CRS and perioperative chemotherapy available at the time of primary cancer resection include positive peritoneal cytology, positive imprint cytology, lymph nodes positive at or near the margin of resection, and T3/T4 mucinous cancer. The selection factors for secondary and primary prevention must be considered by the multidisciplinary team in the management of peritoneal metastases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Sugarbaker PH. Peritonectomy procedures. Ann Surg. 1995;221:29–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Elias D, Gilly F, Boutitie F, et al. Peritoneal colorectal carcinomatosis treated with surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: retrospective analysis of 523 patients from a multicentric French study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:63–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sugarbaker PH. Pseudomyxoma peritonei and peritoneal metastases from appendiceal malignancy. In: Sugarbaker PH, editor. Cytoreductive surgery & perioperative chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy. Textbook and video atlas. Woodbury: Cine-Med Publishing; 2012. p. 57–78. The authors review their experience of over a thousand appendiceal neoplasms. The importance of prognostic indicators in the selection of these patients for treatment has been clearly defined. All patients were treated by cytoreductive surgery and perioperative chemotherapy.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bakrin N, Cotte E, Golfier F, et al. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for persistent and recurrent advanced ovarian carcinoma: a multicenter, prospective study of 246 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:4052–8. Largest study from a multi-institutional registry of 246 patients shows the importance of performance status and peritoneal cancer index to the long-term survival of these patients.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fujimoto S, Takahashi M, Mutou T, et al. Improved mortality rate of gastric carcinoma patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated with intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemoperfusion combined with surgery. Cancer. 1997;79:884–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cerruto CA, Brun EA, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Prognostic significance of histomorphologic parameters in diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1654–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Deraco M, Nonaka D, Baratti D, et al. Prognostic analysis of clinicopathologic factors in 49 patients with diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated with cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:229–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chua TC, Yan TD, Morris DL. Outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal mesothelioma: the Australian experience. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:109–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yan TD, Yoo D, Sugarbaker PH. Significance of lymph node metastasis in patients with diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:948–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baratti D, Kusamura S, Cabras AD, et al. Lymph node metastases in diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:45–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yan TD, Deraco M, Elias D, et al. A novel tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system of diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma using outcome analysis of a multi-institutional database. Cancer. 2011;117:1855–63. Two-hundred and ninety-four patients who had complete cytoreduction and were treated with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy contributed to the registry. The proposed TNM staging system resulted in significant stratification of survival by stage. Prospective data must now be accumulated.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Carmignani CP, Sugarbaker TA, Bromley CM, Sugarbaker PH. Intraperitoneal cancer dissemination: mechanisms of the patterns of spread. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2003;22:465–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yan TD, Sugarbaker PH. Computed tomography in peritoneal surface malignancy. In: Hayat MA, editor. Cancer imaging: Instrumentation and applications. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2008. p. 399–405.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Yan TD, Haveric N, Carmignani CP, et al. Abdominal computed tomography scans in the selection of patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma for comprehensive treatment with cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Cancer. 2005;103:839–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yan TD, Haveric N, Carmignani CP, et al. Computed tomographic characterization of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Tumori. 2005;91:394–400.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chua TC, Morris DL, Esquivel J. Impact of the peritoneal surface disease severity score on survival in patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing complete cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1330–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cashin PH, Graf W, Nygren P, Mahteme H. Comparison of prognostic scores for patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:4183–9. The authors attempt to compare several different systems for assessing the prognosis for colorectal patients with peritoneal metastases treated in a uniform manner.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sugarbaker PH. Peritoneum as the first line of defense in carcinomatosis. J Surg Oncol. 2007;95:93–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacquet P, Sugarbaker PH. Current methodologies for clinical assessment of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 1996;15:9–58.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Look M, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Long-term results of cytoreductive surgery for advanced and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancers and papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2004;14:35–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Carmignani CP, Ortega-Perez G, Sugarbaker PH. The management of synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis and hematogenous metastasis from colorectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004;30:391–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Elias D, Liberale G, Vernerey D, et al. Hepatic and extrahepatic colorectal metastases: when resectable, their localization does not matter, but their total number has a prognostic effect. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:900–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Alberts SR, Horvath WL, Sternfeld WC, et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for patients with unresectable liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:9243–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bijelic L, Kumar AS, Stuart OA, Sugarbaker PH. Systemic chemotherapy prior to cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for carcinomatosis from appendix cancer: impact on perioperative outcomes and short-term survival. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012, Article ID 163284. 6 pages, The authors report that patients who have complete or near complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and are then treated by cytoreductive surgery and perioperative chemotherapy have a profound improvement in survival compared with patients with systemic chemotherapy and stable disease or disease progression.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Yonemura Y, Endou Y, Sasaki T, et al. Surgical treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:1131–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fujiwara Y, Takiguchi S, Nakajima K, et al. Intraperitoneal docetaxel combined with S-1 for advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal dissemination. J Surg Oncol. 2012;105:38–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kitayama J, Ishigami H, Yamaguchi H, et al. Salvage gastrectomy after intravenous and intraperitoneal paclitaxel (PTX) administration with oral S-1 for peritoneal dissemination of advanced gastric cancer with malignant ascites. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:539–46. A new and promising systemic and intraperitoneal treatment monitored by laparoscopy that identifies patients who have a reasonable likelihood of prolonged survival to undergo surgery and excludes those patients who are expected to rapidly recur from extensive surgery. This may be the new standard of care for gastric cancer presenting with peritoneal metastases.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Glehen O, Yonemura Y, Sugarbaker PH. Prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer. In: Sugarbaker PH, editor. Cytoreductive surgery & perioperative chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy. Textbook and video atlas. Woodbury: Cine-Med Publishing; 2012. p. 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Xu DZ, Zhan YQ, Sun XW, et al. Meta-analysis of intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2004;10:2727–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yan TD, Black D, Sugarbaker PH, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials on adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2702–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Honore C, Goere D, Souadka A, et al. Definition of patients presenting a high risk of developing peritoneal carcinomatosis after curative surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:183–92. The authors provide us with valuable information that can be used to select patients for prophylactic HIPEC with primary cancer resection or for second-look HIPEC after treatment with systemic chemotherapy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tsujimoto H, Hiraki S, Sakamoto N, et al. Outcome after emergency surgery in patients with a free perforation caused by gastric cancer. Exp Ther Med. 2010;1:199–203.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Pestieau SR, Sugarbaker PH. Treatment of primary colon cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis: comparison of concomitant vs. delayed management. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:1341–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tentes AA, Kakolyris S, Pallas N, et al. Preliminary results with the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal intraoperative chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy in high-risk colorectal cancer patients. Transl Gastrointest Cancer. 2013;2(1):6–10. doi:10.3978/j.issn.2224-4778.2012.10.02.

  35. Noura S, Ohue M, Shingai T, et al. Effects of intraperitoneal chemotherapy with mitomycin C on the prevention of peritoneal recurrence in colorectal cancer patients with positive peritoneal lavage cytology findings. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:396–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Braam HJ, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during primary tumour resection limits extent of bowel resection compared to two-stage treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39:988–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sammartino P, Sibio S, Accarpio F, Di Giorgio A. Long-term results after proactive management for locoregional control in patients with colonic cancer at high risk of peritoneal metastases. (in press)

  38. Elias D, Goere D, Di Pietrantonio, et al. Results of systematic second-look surgery in patients at high risk of developing colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ann Surg. 2008;247:445–50. Sentinel publication that begins to build a database of selected patients to undergo second-look surgery and hyperthermic perioperative chemotherapy. Individualization of the management of peritoneal metastases leads to long-term survival of approximately 50 % of patients.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sugarbaker PH. Colorectal cancer – Prevention and management of metastatic disease. In: Tsoulfas G, Ho Y, Pramateftakis M, editors. Current innovations in the management of colorectal cancer and hepatic metastatic disease. 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Delhorme JB, Triki E, Romain B, et al. Mandatory second-look surgery after surgical treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis of colonic origin. (personal communication)

  41. da Silva RG, Sugarbaker PH. Analysis of prognosis factors in seventy patients having complete cytoreduction plus perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:878–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Verwaal VJ, van Tinteren H, van Ruth S, Zoetmulder FAN. Predicting the survival of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin treated by aggressive cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Br J Surg. 2004;91:739–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sugarbaker PH, van der Speeten K, Stuart OA, Chang D, Mahteme H. Patient- and treatment-related variables, adverse events and their statistical relationship for treatment of peritoneal metastases. In: Sugarbaker PH, editor. Cytoreductive surgery & perioperative chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy. Textbook and video atlas. Woodbury: Cine-Med Publishing; 2012. p. 183–206.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Van der Speeten K, Stuart OA, Sugarbaker PH. Pharmacology of perioperative cancer chemotherapy. In: Sugarbaker PH, editor. Cytoreductive surgery & perioperative chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy. Textbook and video atlas. Woodbury: Cine-Med Publishing; 2012. p. 159–82.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Thakor AS, Gambhir SS. Nanooncology: the future of cancer diagnosis and therapy. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:395–418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Binder S, Lewis AL, Lohr JM, Keese M. Extravascular use of drug-eluting beads: a promising approach in compartment-based tumor therapy. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:7586–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Paul H. Sugarbaker declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Program in Peritoneal Surface Malignancy, Washington Cancer Institute, 106 Irving St., NW, Suite 3900, Washington, DC, 20010, USA

    Paul H. Sugarbaker

Authors
  1. Paul H. Sugarbaker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul H. Sugarbaker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sugarbaker, P.H. Optimization of Patient Selection for Surgical Approach to Peritoneal Metastases from Gastrointestinal Cancer Using Cytoreductive Surgery and Perioperative Chemotherapy. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 10, 272–278 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-014-0226-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-014-0226-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation