Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)

Author:

Roensholdt Signe12,Detlefsen Sönke1345ORCID,Mortensen Michael1456ORCID,Graversen Martin1456

Affiliation:

1. Odense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloews Vej 4, 5000 Odense, Denmark

2. Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloews Vej 4, 5000 Odense, Denmark

3. Department of Pathology, Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloews Vej 15, 5000 Odense, Denmark

4. Odense Pancreas Center (OPAC), Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloews Vej 4, 5000 Odense, Denmark

5. Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsloews Vej 19, 5000 Odense, Denmark

6. Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloews Vej 4, 5000 Odense, Denmark

Abstract

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) directed therapy emerged as a treatment of peritoneal metastasis (PM) a decade ago. The response assessment of PIPAC is not uniform. This narrative review describes non-invasive and invasive methods for response evaluation of PIPAC and summarizes their current status. PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for eligible publications, and data were reported on an intention-to-treat basis. The peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) showed a response in 18–58% of patients after two PIPACs. Five studies showed a cytological response in ascites or peritoneal lavage fluid in 6–15% of the patients. The proportion of patients with malignant cytology decreased between the first and third PIPAC. A computed tomography showed stable or regressive disease following PIPAC in 15–78% of patients. The peritoneal cancer index was mainly used as a demographic variable, but prospective studies reported a response to treatment in 57–72% of patients. The role of serum biomarkers of cancer or inflammation in the selection of candidates for and responders to PIPAC is not fully evaluated. In conclusion, response evaluation after PIPAC in patients with PM remains difficult, but PRGS seems to be the most promising response evaluation modality.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3