Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

  • Published:
Current Oncology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy provides a means by which high concentrations of drugs and long durations of tissue exposure can be attained at the peritoneal surface. It has been studied widely in ovarian cancer, a disease in which intra-abdominal progression remains the major source of morbidity and mortality. Three large randomized trials have shown improved survival in optimally debulked patients who were treated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy as part of a front-line regimen, yet it has not become part of usual therapy. Several factors have contributed to the reluctance to adopt intraperitoneal therapy, including technical issues related to drug delivery and the fact that all of the large randomized trials employed intraperitoneal cisplatin, which has more toxicity than intravenous carboplatin, the current standard of care. Future research is needed for further definition of the clinical benefit of intraperitoneal chemotherapy, modification of existing regimens to minimize side effects, and exploration of intraperitoneal biologic, immunologic, and gene therapy techniques.

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 and Recommended Reading

  1. Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, et al.: Cancer statistics, 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003, 53:5–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Harries M, Gore M: Part I: Chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer-treatment at first diagnosis. Lancet Oncol 2002, 3:529–536.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fields AL, Runowicz CD: Current therapies in ovarian cancer. Cancer Invest 2003, 21:148–156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yen MS, Juang CM, Lai CR, et al.: Intraperitoneal cisplatinbased chemotherapy vs. intravenous cisplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III optimally cytoreduced epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001, 72:55–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Markman M: Is there a role for intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the management of ovarian cancer? Oncology (Huntingt) 2001, 15:93–98; discussion 103–105.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dedrick RL, Myers CE, Bungay PM, DeVita VT Jr: Pharmacokinetic rationale for peritoneal drug administration in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1978, 62:1–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Los G, Mutsaers PH, van der Vijgh WJ, et al.: Direct diffusion of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum(II) in intraperitoneal rat tumors after intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a comparison with systemic chemotherapy. Cancer Res 1989, 49:3380–3384.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Markman M: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Ann Med 1996, 28:293–296.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hofstra LS, de Vries EG, Mulder NH, et al.: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2000, 26:133–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ratain MJ, Tempero M, Skosey C, eds: Outline of Oncology Therapeutics. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Makhija S, Leitao M, Sabbatini P, et al.: Complications associated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy catheters. Gynecol Oncol 2001, 81:77–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sakuragi N, Nakajima A, Nomura E, et al.: Complications relating to intraperitoneal administration of cisplatin or carboplatin for ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000, 79:420–423.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Alberts DS, Markman M, Armstrong D, et al.: Intraperitoneal therapy for stage III ovarian cancer: a therapy whose time has come! J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:3944–3946.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Conroy SE, Baines L, Rodgers K, et al.: Prevention of chemotherapy-induced intraperitoneal adhesion formation in rats by icodextrin at a range of concentrations. Gynecol Oncol 2003, 88:304–308.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Alberts DS, Liu PY, Hannigan EV, et al.: Intraperitoneal cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide versus intravenous cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide for stage III ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 1996, 335:1950–1955.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Markman M, Bundy BN, Alberts DS, et al.: Phase III trial of standard-dose intravenous cisplatin plus paclitaxel versus moderately high-dose carboplatin followed by intravenous paclitaxel and intraperitoneal cisplatin in small-volume stage III ovarian carcinoma: an Intergroup study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group, Southwestern Oncology Group, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19:1001–1007. This was the first randomized study to evaluate an intraperitonial adjuvant regimen in comparison with the current intravenous standard of care (a platinum and a taxane). In showing a statistically significant survival advantage in the intraperitoneal arm, this trial solidified the interest in the therapeutic value of intraperitoneal chemotherapy that Alberts et al. [15] had initiated in 1996.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Armstrong D, Bundy BN, Baergen R, et al.: Randomized phase III study of intravenous (IV) paclitaxel and cisplatin versus IV paclitaxel, intraperitoneal (IP) cisplatin and IP paclitaxel in optimal stage III epithelial ovarin cancer (OC): a Gynecologic Oncology Group trial (GOG 172) [abstract 803]. Proc ASCO 2002, 21:201a. GOG-172 is the first large randomized trial to use intraperitonial cisplatin and intraperitoneal paclitaxel in optimally debulked, stage III ovarian cancer patients, the population that has historically gained the most from adjuvant intraperitoneal therapy. The immature data suggest a time to progression benefit in the intraperitonial arm, but we need to wait to see whether this translates into an overall survival advantage. It is clear that this intraperitonial regimen has significantly more acute toxicity.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Polyzos A, Tsavaris N, Kosmas C, et al.: A comparative study of intraperitoneal carboplatin versus intravenous carboplatin with intravenous cyclophosphamide in both arms as initial chemotherapy for stage III ovarian cancer. Oncology 1999, 56:291–296.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gadducci A, Carnino F, Chiara S, et al.: Intraperitoneal versus intravenous cisplatin in combination with intravenous cyclophosphamide and epidoxorubicin in optimally cytoreduced advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a randomized trial of the Gruppo Oncologico Nord-Ovest. Gynecol Oncol 2000, 76:157–162.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kirmani S, Braly PS, McClay EF, et al.: A comparison of intravenous versus intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the initial treatment of ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1994, 54:338–344.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Barakat RR, Almadrones L, Venkatraman ES, et al.: A phase II trial of intraperitoneal cisplatin and etoposide as consolidation therapy in patients with stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer following negative surgical assessment. Gynecol Oncol 1998, 69:17–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Piccart MJ, Floquet A, Scarfone G, et al.: Intraperitoneal (IP) cisplatin (P) versus no further treatment: 8 year-results of an EORTC-GCG randomized phase III study in ovarian cancer (O.C.) patients (PTS) with a pathologically complete remission (PCR) after P-based induction chemotherapy (CT) and cytoreductive surgery [abstract PL24]. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003, 13(Suppl 1):8. This is the first randomized trial to prospectively evaluate the utility of intraperitoneal consolidation in the setting of ovarian cancer that has completely responded to initial intravenous chemotherapy. The presence of a trend toward benefit in the treatment arm seems to indicate that intraperitoneal consolidation warrants further investigation.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Reichman B, Markman M, Hakes T, et al.: Intraperitoneal cisplatin and etoposide in the treatment of refractory/recurrent ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1989, 7:1327–1332.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Markman M, Reichman B, Hakes T, et al.: Impact on survival of surgically defined favorable responses to salvage intraperitoneal chemotherapy in small-volume residual ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 1992, 10:1479–1484.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Markman M, Reichman B, Hakes T, et al.: Responses to secondline cisplatin-based intraperitoneal therapy in ovarian cancer: influence of a prior response to intravenous cisplatin. J Clin Oncol 1991, 9:1801–1805.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Varia M, Rosenman J, Venkatraman S, et al.: Intraperitoneal chromic phosphate therapy after second-look laparotomy for ovarian cancer. Cancer 1988, 61:919–927.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Peters WA III, Smith MR, Cain JM, et al.: Intraperitoneal P-32 is not an effective consolidation therapy after a negative second-look laparotomy for epithelial carcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol 1992, 47:146–149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Spanos WJ Jr, Day T Jr, Jose B, et al.: Use of P-32 in stage III epithelial carcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol 1994, 54:35–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Young RC, Brady MF, Nieberg RM, et al.: Randomized clinical trial of adjuvant treatment of women with early (Figo-I-IIA high risk) Ovarian Cancer-GOG #95 [abstract 1376]. Proc ASCO 1999, 18:357a.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mahe MA, Fumoleau P, Fabbro M, et al.: A phase II study of intraperitoneal radioimmunotherapy with iodine-131-labeled monoclonal antibody OC-125 in patients with residual ovarian carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 1999, 5(Suppl):3249s-3253s.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Alvarez RD, Partridge EE, Khazaeli MB, et al.: Intraperitoneal radioimmunotherapy of ovarian cancer with 177Lu-CC49: a phase I/II study. Gynecol Oncol 1997, 65:94–101.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Stewart JS, Hird V, Snook D, et al.: Intraperitoneal 131I- and 90Y-labelled monoclonal antibodies for ovarian cancer: pharmacokinetics and normal tissue dosimetry. Int J Cancer Suppl 1988, 3:71–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Meredith RF, Alvarez RD, Partridge EE, et al.: Intraperitoneal radioimmunochemotherapy of ovarian cancer: a phase I study. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2001, 16:305–315.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Alvarez RD, Huh WK, Khazaeli MB, et al.: A phase I study of combined modality (90)Yttrium-CC49 intraperitoneal radioimmunotherapy for ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2002, 8:2806–2811.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Balkwill F, Schlom J, Berek J, et al.: Immunological therapeutics in ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002, 88:S110-S113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pujade-Lauraine E, Guastalla JP, Colombo N, et al.: Intraperitoneal recombinant interferon gamma in ovarian cancer patients with residual disease at second-look laparotomy. J Clin Oncol 1996, 14:343–350.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaufmann M, Schmid H, Raeth U, et al.: Therapy of ascites with tumor necrosis factor in ovarian cancer [in German]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1990, 50:678–682.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Hu L, Hofmann J, Zaloudek C, et al.: Vascular endothelial growth factor immunoneutralization plus paclitaxel markedly reduces tumor burden and ascites in athymic mouse model of ovarian cancer. Am J Pathol 2002, 161:1917–1924.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaye SB: Ovarian cancer, from the laboratory to the clinic: challenges for the future. Ann Oncol 1996, 7:9–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wen SF, Mahavni V, Quijano E, et al.: Assessment of p53 gene transfer and biological activities in a clinical study of adenovirus-p53 gene therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer. Cancer Gene Ther 2003, 10:224–238.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Buller RE, Runnebaum IB, Karlan BY, et al.: A phase I/II trial of rAd/p53 (SCH 58500) gene replacement in recurrent ovarian cancer. Cancer Gene Ther 2002, 9:553–566.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Vasey PA, Shulman LN, Campos S, et al.: Phase I trial of intraperitoneal injection of the E1B-55-kd-gene-deleted adenovirus ONYX-015 (dl1520) given on days 1 through 5 every 3 weeks in patients with recurrent/refractory epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:1562–1569.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Peng KW, TenEyck CJ, Galanis E, et al.: Intraperitoneal therapy of ovarian cancer using an engineered measles virus. Cancer Res 2002, 62:4656–4662.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Chicago Medical Center, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, MC 2115, 60637-1470, Chicago, IL, USA

    Gregory Friberg MD & Gini Fleming MD

Authors
  1. Gregory Friberg MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gini Fleming MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Friberg, G., Fleming, G. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 5, 447–453 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-003-0004-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-003-0004-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation