TY - JOUR
T1 - Cytoreductive Surgery with or without Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases (CYTO-CHIP study)
T2 - A propensity score analysis
AU - FREGAT and BIG-RENAPE Networks
AU - Bonnot, Pierre Emmanuel
AU - Piessen, Guillaume
AU - Kepenekian, Vahan
AU - Decullier, Evelyne
AU - Pocard, Marc
AU - Meunier, Bernard
AU - Bereder, Jean Marc
AU - Abboud, Karine
AU - Marchal, Frédéric
AU - Quenet, François
AU - Goere, Diane
AU - Msika, Simon
AU - Arvieux, Catherine
AU - Pirro, Nicolas
AU - Wernert, Romuald
AU - Rat, Patrick
AU - Gagnière, Johan
AU - Lefevre, Jeremie H.
AU - Courvoisier, Thomas
AU - Kianmanesh, Reza
AU - Vaudoyer, Delphine
AU - Rivoire, Michel
AU - Meeus, Pierre
AU - Passot, Guillaume
AU - Glehen, Olivier
AU - Abba, Julio
AU - Alyami, Mohammad
AU - Bakrin, Naoual
AU - Bernard, Jean Louis
AU - Bibeau, F.
AU - Bouzard, Dominique
AU - Brigand, C.
AU - Carrère, Sébastien
AU - Carretier, Michel
AU - Castel, Benjamin
AU - Cotte, Eddy
AU - Celerier, Bertrand
AU - Ceribelli, Cécilia
AU - De Chaisemartin, Cécile
AU - De Franco, Valeria
AU - Deguelte-Lardiere, Sophie
AU - Delpero, Jean Robert
AU - Desolneux, Grégoire
AU - Dumont, Frédéric
AU - Eveno, Clarisse
AU - Durand-Fontanier, Sylvaine
AU - Evrard, Serge
AU - Facy, Olivier
AU - Gilly, François Noeël
AU - Sourrouille, Isabelle
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2019 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/8/10
Y1 - 2019/8/10
N2 - PURPOSE Gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastases (PMs) is a poor prognostic evolution. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) yields promising results, but the impact of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains controversial. Here we aimed to compare outcomes between CRS-HIPEC versus CRS alone (CRSa) among patients with PMs from GC. PATIENTS AND METHODS From prospective databases, we identified 277 patients with PMs from GC who were treated with complete CRS with curative intent (no residual nodules . 2.5 mm) at 19 French centers from 1989 to 2014. Of these patients, 180 underwent CRS-HIPEC and 97 CRSa. Tumor burden was assessed using the peritoneal cancer index. A Cox proportional hazards regression model with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity score was used to assess the effect of HIPEC and account for confounding factors. RESULTS After IPTW adjustment, the groups were similar, except that median peritoneal cancer index remained higher in the CRS-HIPEC group (6 v 2; P = .003). CRS-HIPEC improved overall survival (OS) in both crude and IPTW models. Upon IPTW analysis, in CRS-HIPEC and CRSa groups, median OS was 18.8 versus 12.1 months, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 26.21% and 19.87% versus 10.82% and 6.43% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.86; P = .005), and 3- and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 20.40% and 17.05% versus 5.87% and 3.76% (P = .001), respectively; the groups did not differ regarding 90-day mortality (7.4% v 10.1%, respectively; P = .820) or major complication rate (53.7% v 55.3%, respectively; P = .496). CONCLUSION Compared with CRSa, CRS-HIPEC improved OS and recurrence-free survival, without additional morbidity or mortality. When complete CRS is possible, CRS-HIPEC may be considered a valuable therapy for strictly selected patients with limited PMs from GC.
AB - PURPOSE Gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastases (PMs) is a poor prognostic evolution. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) yields promising results, but the impact of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains controversial. Here we aimed to compare outcomes between CRS-HIPEC versus CRS alone (CRSa) among patients with PMs from GC. PATIENTS AND METHODS From prospective databases, we identified 277 patients with PMs from GC who were treated with complete CRS with curative intent (no residual nodules . 2.5 mm) at 19 French centers from 1989 to 2014. Of these patients, 180 underwent CRS-HIPEC and 97 CRSa. Tumor burden was assessed using the peritoneal cancer index. A Cox proportional hazards regression model with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on propensity score was used to assess the effect of HIPEC and account for confounding factors. RESULTS After IPTW adjustment, the groups were similar, except that median peritoneal cancer index remained higher in the CRS-HIPEC group (6 v 2; P = .003). CRS-HIPEC improved overall survival (OS) in both crude and IPTW models. Upon IPTW analysis, in CRS-HIPEC and CRSa groups, median OS was 18.8 versus 12.1 months, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 26.21% and 19.87% versus 10.82% and 6.43% (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.86; P = .005), and 3- and 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 20.40% and 17.05% versus 5.87% and 3.76% (P = .001), respectively; the groups did not differ regarding 90-day mortality (7.4% v 10.1%, respectively; P = .820) or major complication rate (53.7% v 55.3%, respectively; P = .496). CONCLUSION Compared with CRSa, CRS-HIPEC improved OS and recurrence-free survival, without additional morbidity or mortality. When complete CRS is possible, CRS-HIPEC may be considered a valuable therapy for strictly selected patients with limited PMs from GC.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067281437&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.18.01688
DO - 10.1200/JCO.18.01688
M3 - Article
C2 - 31084544
AN - SCOPUS:85067281437
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 37
SP - 2028
EP - 2040
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 23
ER -