Cargando…

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

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 summari...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roensholdt, Signe, Detlefsen, Sönke, Mortensen, Michael Bau, Graversen, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9963217/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36835824
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041289
_version_ 1784896198406045696
author Roensholdt, Signe
Detlefsen, Sönke
Mortensen, Michael Bau
Graversen, Martin
author_facet Roensholdt, Signe
Detlefsen, Sönke
Mortensen, Michael Bau
Graversen, Martin
author_sort Roensholdt, Signe
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9963217
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99632172023-02-26 Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Roensholdt, Signe Detlefsen, Sönke Mortensen, Michael Bau Graversen, Martin J Clin Med Review 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. MDPI 2023-02-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9963217/ /pubmed/36835824 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041289 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Roensholdt, Signe
Detlefsen, Sönke
Mortensen, Michael Bau
Graversen, Martin
Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title_full Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title_fullStr Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title_full_unstemmed Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title_short Response Evaluation in Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis Treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
title_sort response evaluation in patients with peritoneal metastasis treated with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (pipac)
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9963217/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36835824
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041289
work_keys_str_mv AT roensholdtsigne responseevaluationinpatientswithperitonealmetastasistreatedwithpressurizedintraperitonealaerosolchemotherapypipac
AT detlefsensonke responseevaluationinpatientswithperitonealmetastasistreatedwithpressurizedintraperitonealaerosolchemotherapypipac
AT mortensenmichaelbau responseevaluationinpatientswithperitonealmetastasistreatedwithpressurizedintraperitonealaerosolchemotherapypipac
AT graversenmartin responseevaluationinpatientswithperitonealmetastasistreatedwithpressurizedintraperitonealaerosolchemotherapypipac