Search

Background: Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) owing to extensive peritoneal disease have a poor prognosis. It was hypothesized that these patients may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal irinotecan to standard palliative systemic chemotherapy. Methods: This was a classical 3 + 3 phase I dose-escalation trial in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who were not eligible for CRS-HIPEC. Intraperitoneal irinotecan was administered every 2 weeks, concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin)--bevacizumab. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary objectives were to elucidate the systemic and intraperitoneal pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and efficacy. Results: Eighteen patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with 50 mg (4 patients) and 75 mg (9 patients) intraperitoneal irinotecan. Two dose-limiting toxicities occurred with 100 mg irinotecan among five patients. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was established to be 75 mg, and it was well tolerated. Intraperitoneal exposure to SN- 38 (active metabolite of irinotecan) was high compared with systemic exposure (median intraperitoneal area under the curve (AUC) to systemic AUC ratio 4.6). Thirteen patients had a partial radiological response and five had stable disease. Four patients showed a complete response during post-treatment diagnostic laparoscopy. Five patients underwent salvage resection or CRS-HIPEC. Median overall survival was 23.9 months. Conclusion: Administration of 75 mg intraperitoneal irinotecan concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX--bevacizumab was safe and well tolerated. Intraperitoneal SN-38 exposure was high and prolonged. As oncological outcomes were promising, intraperitoneal administration of irinotecan may be a good alternative to other, more invasive and costly treatment options. A phase II study is currently accruing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Patients treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) are at risk of significant treatment burden. Multiple studies have reported on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements of these patients. However, outcomes are difficult to interpret as no comparison has been made between CRS-HIPEC and conventional surgery. The present study compares several PROs at three different timepoints between patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with CRS-HIPEC and colorectal cancer (CRC) patients treated with conventional surgery. PROs were obtained from two Dutch prospective trials. Despite a more extensive procedure with greater risk of morbidity, CRS-HIPEC in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases did not have a greater negative impact on PROs than conventional surgery in patients with CRC. Furthermore, systemic therapy did not affect these PROs. These findings may facilitate future patient counseling and shared decision making in clinical practice. Purpose—To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases to PROs of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing conventional surgery. Methods—Data were extracted from the CAIRO6 trial (CRS-HIPEC group) and the PROCORE study (conventional surgery group). Nine predefined PROs (derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire) were compared at baseline, in the early postoperative period and one year postoperatively, with correction for treatment with systemic therapy using linear mixed modeling. Results—In total, 331 patients were included: 71 in the CRS-HIPEC group and 260 in the conventional surgery group. All predefined PROs (fatigue, diarrhea, C30 summary score, Global Health Status, physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning) did not differ significantly between the groups at all three timepoints, and differential effects over time for all PROs did not differ significantly between the groups. Significant worsening of fatigue, C30 summary score, physical and role functioning (both groups), and cognitive and social functioning (conventional surgery group only) was present in the early postoperative period. All scores returned to baseline at one year postoperatively, except for physical and cognitive functioning in the conventional surgery group. Emotional functioning improved postoperatively in both groups compared to baseline. Conclusion—Despite a more extensive procedure with greater risk of morbidity, CRS-HIPEC in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases did not have a greater negative impact on PROs than conventional surgery in patients with CRC. Further, systemic therapy did not affect these PROs. These findings may facilitate future patient counseling and shared decision making in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Total mesorectal excision is the cornerstone for rectal cancer curation. However, elderly and frail patients may not be able to undergo a surgical procedure. These patients often receive no treatment at all and are at risk for developing debilitating symptoms that impair quality of life. Recent developments in the non-operative management of rectal cancer have increased the possibilities to provide patients with an alternative treatment if surgery is not possible, in an effort to avoid the onset of debilitating symptoms, improve quality of life, and prolong survival. The heterogeneity within the elderly and frail population requires a patient-centred approach to optimise treatment. The aim of this narrative review was to discuss a multidisciplinary and patient-centred treatment approach for the personalised non-operative management of elderly and frail rectal cancer patients. The narrative review also provides a practical suggestion of a successfully implemented multidisciplinary clinical care pathway, based on a literature review. Despite it being the optimal curative approach, elderly and frail rectal cancer patients may not be able to undergo a total mesorectal excision. Frequently, no treatment is offered at all and the natural course of the disease is allowed to unfold. These patients are at risk for developing debilitating symptoms that impair quality of life and require palliative treatment. Recent advancements in non-operative treatment modalities have enhanced the toolbox of alternative treatment strategies in patients unable to undergo surgery. Therefore, a proposed strategy is to aim for the maximal non-operative treatment, in an effort to avoid the onset of debilitating symptoms, improve quality of life, and prolong survival. The complexity of treating elderly and frail patients requires a patient-centred approach to personalise treatment. The main challenge is to optimise the balance between local control of disease, patient preferences, and the burden of treatment. A comprehensive geriatric assessment is a crucial element within the multidisciplinary dialogue. Since limited knowledge is available on the optimal non-operative treatment strategy, these patients should be treated by dedicated multidisciplinary rectal cancer experts with special interest in the elderly and frail. The aim of this narrative review was to discuss a multidisciplinary patient-centred treatment approach and provide a practical suggestion of a successfully implemented clinical care pathway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Low skeletal muscle index (SMI) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients is associated with poor outcomes. The prognostic impact of SMI changes during consecutive palliative systemic treatments is unknown. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of the phase 3 CAIRO3 study. The CAIRO3 study randomized 557 patients between maintenance capecitabine + bevacizumab (CAP‐B) or observation, after six cycles capecitabine + oxaliplatin + bevacizumab (CAPOX‐B). Upon first disease progression (PD1), CAPOX‐B was reintroduced until second progression (PD2). SMI was assessed by computed tomography (CT) (total 1355 scans). SMI and body mass index (BMI) changes were analyzed for three time‐periods; p1: during initial CAPOX‐B, p2: randomization to PD1, and p3: PD1 to PD2. The association between absolute and change in SMI and BMI (both per 1 standard deviation) during p1‐p3, with PD1, PD2, and survival was studied by Cox regression models. Results: This analysis included 450 of the 557 patients randomized in the CAIRO3 study. Mean SMI decreased during p1: mean −0.6 SMI units [95% CI −1.07;‐0.26] and p3: −2.2 units [−2.7;‐1.8], whereas during p2, SMI increased + 1.2 units [0.8‐1.6]. BMI changes did not reflect changes in SMI. SMI loss during p2 and p3 was significantly associated with shorter survival (HR 1.19 [1.09‐1.35]; 1.54 [1.31‐1.79], respectively). Sarcopenia at PD1 was significantly associated with early PD2 (HR 1.40 [1.10‐1.70]). BMI loss independent of SMI loss was only associated with shorter overall survival during p3 (HR 1.35 [1.14‐1.63]). Conclusions: In mCRC patients, SMI loss during palliative systemic treatment was related with early disease progression and reduced survival. BMI did not reflect changes in SMI and could not identify patients at risk of poor outcome during early treatment lines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has become standard of care for patients with peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin with a low/moderate abdominal disease load. In case of a peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score >20, CRS-HIPEC is not considered to be beneficial. Patients with a PCI >20 are currently offered palliative systemic chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown that systemic chemotherapy is less effective against peritoneal metastases than it is against haematogenous spread of colorectal cancer. It is suggested that patients with peritoneal metastases may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to systemic chemotherapy. Aim of this study is to establish the maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan, added to standard of care systemic therapy for colorectal cancer. Secondary endpoints are to determine the safety and feasibility of this treatment and to establish the pharmacokinetic profile of intraperitoneally administered irinotecan. Methods and analysis This phase I, ‘3+3’ dose-escalation, study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral centres. The study population consists of adult patients with extensive peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin who have a good performance status and no extra-abdominal metastases. According to standard work-up for CRS-HIPEC, patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy to score the PCI. In case of a PCI >20, a peritoneal access port will be placed in the abdomen of the patient. Through this port we will administer intraperitoneal irinotecan, in combination with standard systemic treatment consisting of 5-fluorouracil/ leucovorin with oxaliplatin and the targeted agent bevacizumab. Therapy consists of a maximum of 12 cycles 2-weekly. Ethics and dissemination This study protocol is approved by a research medical ethics committee (Rotterdam, Netherlands) and the Dutch Competent Authority (CCMO, The Hague, Netherlands). The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX) is offered as a palliative treatment option for patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in several centres worldwide. However, little is known about its feasibility, safety, tolerability, efficacy, costs and pharmacokinetics in this setting. This study aims to explore these parameters in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal PM who receive repetitive ePIPAC-OX as a palliative monotherapy. Methods and analysis This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals for the surgical treatment of colorectal PM. Eligible patients are adults who have histologically or cytologically proven isolated unresectable PM of a colorectal or appendiceal carcinoma, a good performance status, adequate organ functions and no symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction. Instead of standard palliative treatment, enrolled patients receive laparoscopycontrolled ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m2 body surface area (BSA)) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2 BSA) and bolus 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2 BSA) every 6 weeks. Four weeks after each procedure, patients undergo clinical, radiological and biochemical evaluation. ePIPAC-OX is repeated until disease progression, after which standard palliative treatment is (re)considered. The primary outcome is the number of patients with major toxicity (grade =3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) up to 4 weeks after the last ePIPAC-OX. Secondary outcomes are the environmental safety of ePIPAC-OX, procedure-related characteristics, minor toxicity, postoperative complications, hospital stay, readmissions, quality of life, costs, pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, progression-free survival, overall survival, and the radiological, histopathological, cytological, biochemical and macroscopic tumour response. Ethics and dissemination This study is approved by an ethics committee, the Dutch competent authority and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results are intended for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and for presentation to patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:We conducted a population-based study to establish the incidence, treatment and overall survival over time of patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma. Material and methods:All patients diagnosed with small bowel adenocarcinoma in the Netherlands between 1999 and 2013 were included (n = 1775). Age-standardized incidence rates were calculated per 100 000 person-years using the European standardized population rate. The influence of patient and tumor characteristics on the administration of chemotherapy was analyzed by means of a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was conducted to evaluate trends in treatment and survival and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify prognostic factors of overall survival. Results:The incidence of small bowel adenocarcinomas increased, mainly due to an almost twofold increase of duodenal adenocarcinomas. Patients with locoregional duodenal tumors were less likely to undergo surgery (58%), towards 95% of the locoregional jejunal and ileal tumors (p < 0.0001). The use of chemotherapy doubled for adjuvant (7–15%) and palliative chemotherapy (19–37%). Median overall survival of patients with locoregional disease increased from 19 to 34 months (p = 0.0006), whereas median overall survival of patients with metastatic disease remained 4–5 months. Favorable prognostic factors for prolonged survival in locoregional disease, identified by multivariable survival analysis, included age <60 years, tumor stage I or II, diagnosis in 2009–2013, surgical treatment and chemotherapy. Favorable prognostic factors for prolonged survival in metastatic disease were age <50 years, jejunal tumors, surgical treatment and chemotherapy. Conclusion:Small bowel adenocarcinomas are rare tumors with an increasing incidence. The administration of adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy doubled, but median overall survival only increased for patients with locoregional disease. Given the rarity and dismal prognosis, it is important to develop international studies to determine the optimal treatment for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: In anthracycline-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients, it is unknown whether weekly single-agent docetaxel is preferable to 3-weekly docetaxel regarding its toxicity and efficacy profile. Patients and methods: In this multicenter, randomised, open-label phase III trial, 162 patients were randomised to weekly docetaxel (group A) or 3-weekly docetaxel (group B). The primary end-point was tolerability; secondary end-points were efficacy and quality of life (QoL). Results: Group A (weekly docetaxel, n =79) experienced less haematological toxicity, with just 1.3% versus 16.9% febrile neutropenia in group B (3-weekly docetaxel, n =77) (p =0.001). Not this difference, but fatigue and general malaise foremost led to more patient withdrawals in group A (24 versus 12 patients, p =0.032), less patients completing treatment (29 versus 43 patients, p =0.014) and reduced dose-intensity (15.6 versus 26mg/m2/week, 58% versus 70% of projected dose, p =0.017). As a result, 3-weekly docetaxel was related to better overall survival in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 0.70, p =0.036), although in univariate analysis efficacy was similar in both groups. Reported QoL was similar in both groups, but less effective treatment with more general toxicity led to less completed QoL forms in group A (65.4% versus 50%, p=0.049). Conclusion: Weekly docetaxel is less well tolerated than a 3-weekly schedule, due to more non-haematological toxicity, despite less febrile neutropenia. Also, no efficacy benefits can be demonstrated for weekly docetaxel, which may even be inferior based on multivariate analysis. Therefore, a 3-weekly schedule should be preferred in the setting of MBC. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: The peritoneum is the second most affected organ for the dissemination of colorectal cancer (CRC). Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) face a poor prognosis, despite the majority of patients being treated with palliative systemic therapy. The efficacy of palliative systemic therapy is limited due to the plasma-peritoneum barrier. The poor prognosis of unresectable CPM patients has resulted in the development of new treatment strategies where systemic therapy is combined with local, intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the recently published phase I study, the maximum tolerated dose and thus the recommended phase II dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was investigated and determined to be 75 mg. In the present study, the overall survival after treatment with 75 mg irinotecan with concomitant mFOLFOX4 and bevacizumab will be investigated., Materials and Methods: In this single-arm phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 85 patients are enrolled. Eligibility criteria are an adequate performance status and organ function, histologically confirmed microsatellite stable and unresectable CPM, no previous palliative therapy for CRC, no systemic therapy<6 months for CRC prior to enrolment and no previous cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS and HIPEC). Patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy as standard work-up for CPM and if the peritoneal disease is considered unresectable (eg, Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI)>20, too extensive small bowel involvement), a peritoneal access port and a port-a-cath are placed for administration of intraperitoneal and intravenous chemotherapy, respectively. Patients may undergo up to 12 cycles of study treatment. Each cycle consists of intravenous mFOLFOX4 with bevacizumab and concomitant intraperitoneal irinotecan (75 mg), which is repeated every 2 weeks, with a maximum of 12 cycles. Modified FOLFOX-4 regimen consists of 85 mg/m 2 oxaliplatin plus 200 mg/m 2 LV and 5-FU 400 mg/m 2 bolus on day 1 followed by 1600 mg/m 2 5-FU as a 46 hours infusion. Study treatment ends after the 12th cycle, or earlier in case of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome is overall survival and key secondary outcomes are progression-free survival, safety (measured by the amount of grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0)), patient-reported outcomes and pharmacokinetics of irinotecan. It is hypothesised that the trial treatment will lead to a 4 month increase in overall survival; from a median of 12.2 to 16.2 months., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by the Dutch Authority (CCMO, the Hague, the Netherlands), by a central medical ethics committee (MEC-U, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands) and by the institutional research boards of both research centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals., Trial Registration Number: NCT06003998., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Despite its increasing use, first-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX), hereinafter referred to as first-line bidirectional therapy, has never been prospectively investigated in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). As a first step to address this evidence gap, the present study aims to assess the safety, feasibility, antitumour activity, patient-reported outcomes, costs and systemic pharmacokinetics of first-line bidirectional therapy in patients with isolated unresectable CPM., Methods and Analysis: In this single-arm, phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 20 patients are enrolled. Key eligibility criteria are a good performance status, pathologically proven isolated unresectable CPM, no previous palliative systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, no (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy ≤6 months prior to enrolment and no previous pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Patients receive three cycles of bidirectional therapy. Each cycle consists of 6 weeks first-line palliative systemic therapy at the medical oncologists' decision (CAPOX-bevacizumab, FOLFOX-bevacizumab, FOLFIRI-bevacizumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab) followed by ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 ) with an intraoperative bolus of intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 ). Study treatment ends after the third ePIPAC-OX. The primary outcome is the number of patients with-and procedures leading to-grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0) up to 4 weeks after the last procedure. Key secondary outcomes include the number of bidirectional cycles in each patient, treatment-related characteristics, grade ≤2 adverse events, tumour response (histopathological, cytological, radiological, biochemical, macroscopic and ascites), patient-reported outcomes, systemic pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, costs, progression-free survival and overall survival., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by the Dutch competent authority, a medical ethics committee and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals., Trial Registration Number: NL8303., Competing Interests: Competing interests: IHJTH received grants, paid to the institute, from Roche, QP&S and RanD Biotech outside the submitted work. This manuscript is based on the study protocol version 4.0, 15 June 2020., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX) is offered as a palliative treatment option for patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in several centres worldwide. However, little is known about its feasibility, safety, tolerability, efficacy, costs and pharmacokinetics in this setting. This study aims to explore these parameters in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal PM who receive repetitive ePIPAC-OX as a palliative monotherapy., Methods and Analysis: This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals for the surgical treatment of colorectal PM. Eligible patients are adults who have histologically or cytologically proven isolated unresectable PM of a colorectal or appendiceal carcinoma, a good performance status, adequate organ functions and no symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction. Instead of standard palliative treatment, enrolled patients receive laparoscopy-controlled ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m 2 body surface area (BSA)) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m 2 BSA) and bolus 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m 2 BSA) every 6 weeks. Four weeks after each procedure, patients undergo clinical, radiological and biochemical evaluation. ePIPAC-OX is repeated until disease progression, after which standard palliative treatment is (re)considered. The primary outcome is the number of patients with major toxicity (grade ≥3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) up to 4 weeks after the last ePIPAC-OX. Secondary outcomes are the environmental safety of ePIPAC-OX, procedure-related characteristics, minor toxicity, postoperative complications, hospital stay, readmissions, quality of life, costs, pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, progression-free survival, overall survival, and the radiological, histopathological, cytological, biochemical and macroscopic tumour response., Ethics and Dissemination: This study is approved by an ethics committee, the Dutch competent authority and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results are intended for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and for presentation to patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders., Trial Registration Number: NCT03246321, Pre-results; ISRCTN89947480, Pre-results; NTR6603, Pre-results; EudraCT: 2017-000927-29, Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Irinotecan, the prodrug of SN-38, is extensively metabolized by cytochrome P450-3A4 (CYP3A4). A randomized trial was done to assess the utility of an algorithm for individualized irinotecan dose calculation based on a priori CYP3A4 activity measurements by the midazolam clearance test., Experimental Design: Patients were randomized to receive irinotecan at a conventional dose level of 350 mg/m(2) (group A) or doses based on an equation consisting of midazolam clearance, gamma-glutamyl-transferase, and height (group B). Pharmacokinetics and toxicities were obtained during the first treatment course., Results: Demographics of 40 evaluable cancer patients were balanced between both groups, including UGT1A1*28 genotype and smoking status. The absolute dose of irinotecan ranged from 480 to 800 mg in group A and 380 to 1,060 mg in group B. The mean absolute dose and area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 were not significantly different in either group (P > 0.18). In group B, the interindividual variability in the area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 was reduced by 19% and 25%, respectively (P > 0.22). Compared with group A, the incidence of grades 3 to 4 neutropenia was >4-fold lower in group B (45 versus 10%; P = 0.013). The incidence of grades 3 to 4 diarrhea was equal in both groups (10%)., Conclusions: Incorporation of CYP3A4 phenotyping in dose calculation resulted in an improved predictability of the pharmacokinetic and toxicity profile of irinotecan, thereby lowering the incidence of severe neutropenia. In combination with UGT1A1*28 genotyping, CYP3A4 phenotype determination should be explored further as a strategy for the individualization of irinotecan treatment.