Specific features of current intraperitoneal therapy in patients with ovarian cancer

Background. Today there are 3 trends in favor of intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy: maintenance of its potential 5- and 10-year survival benefit in patients with ovarian cancer (OC); advantages of the IP administration of drugs even after nonoptimal surgery; enhancement of the efficiency of chemotherapy irrespective of the number of IP treatment cycles. There is also an expanded list of possible IP medicines and incorporation of novel targeted drugs into treatment regimens. However, the long-expected data of the most recent randomized trial GOG 0252 have proven deplorable and led to the activation of discussions on the role of IP therapy.

Objective: to generalize the experience of 4 oncology departments with IP therapy in patients with disseminated OC and to compare the findings with those obtained by the world’s leading medical centers.

Materials and methods. The retrospective analysis included 76 patients with Stage IIIC OC who had received IP chemotherapy in accordance with 3 regimens. For standardization of IP treatment procedures, the investigators assessed the following indicators: age; tumor morphological type; surgical radicality; catheter model and port placement procedure; drug administration route; number of treatment cycles; efficiency of therapy from expert ultrasonographic findings and CA-124, HE4, CA-19.9 marker levels, time to disease progression. The analysis also involved adverse manifestations, methods of their correction and the reasons for early treatment discontinuation were separately reported. The obtained data were processed using standard statistical programs.

Results. 55 of the 76 patients could complete more than 4 IP therapy cycles. Among them, only 4 patients were observed to have disease progression at follow-ups lasting over 24 months.

Conclusion. Current IP therapy is a safe and convenient drug treatment in patients with OC after optimal cytoreductive surgery. The mastery and standardization of the procedures for surgery and placement of current IP Celsite® Peritoneal and Celsite® Drainaport devices make it possible to minimize adverse manifestations and to perform all planned therapy cycles in necessary mode, by giving 50 % of the optimally operated patients with OC (Stage IIIC) the chance to have a long-term progression-free survival that is over 2 years, as shown by our observations.

1. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2014 году. Под ред. А.Д. Каприна, В.В. Старинского, Г.В. Петровой. М., 2015. С. 6. [Condition of the oncological help to the population of Russia in 2014. Ed. by A.D. Kaprin, V.V. Starinskiy, G.V. Petrova. Moscow, 2015. P. 6. (In Russ.)].

2. Dedrick R.I., Myers C.E., Bungay P.M., De-Vita V.T. Jr. Pharmacokinetic rationale for peritoneal drug administration in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1978;62(1):1–11.

3. Rubin S.C., Hoskins W.J., Markman M. et al. Long-term access to the peritoneal cavity in ovarian cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol 1989;33(1):46–8.

4. Bookman M.A., Brady M.F. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy: long-term outcomes revive a long-running debate. J Clin Oncol 2015;33(13):1424–6.

5. Chan J.K., Monk B.J. Reply to F.M. Muggia. J Clin Oncol 2016;34(8):882–3.

6. Yen M.S., Juang C.M., Lai C.R. et al. Intraperitoneal cisplatin-based chemotherapy vs. intravenous cisplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III optimally cytoreduced epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2001;72(1):55–60.

7. Topuz E., Salihoglu Y., Aydiner A. et al. Celsite port and catheter as an intraperitoneal access device in the treatment of ovarian cancer. J Surg Oncol 2000;74(3):223–6.

8. Tenckhoff H., Schechter H. A bacteriologically safe peritoneal access device. Trans Am Soc Artif Intern Organs 1968;14:181–7.

9. Baron M.A. Structure of intestinal peritoneum in man. Am J Anat 1941;69:439.

10. Helm C.W. Ports and complications for intraperitoneal chemotherapy delivery. BJOG 2012;119(2):150–9.

11. Loureiro J., Aguilera A., Selgas R. et al. Blocking TGF-β1 protects the peritoneal membrane from dialysate-induced damage. J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;22(9):1682–95.

12. Fung-Kee-Fung M., Provencher D., Rosen B. et al. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer: a review of the evidence and standards for the delivery of care. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105(3):747–56.

13. 13. Winner K.R., Steinkamp M.P., Lee R.J. et al. Spatial modeling of drug delivery routes for treatment of disseminated ovarian cancer. Cancer Res 2016;76(6):1320–34.

14. Seagle B.L., Eng K.H., Yeh J.Y. et al. Discovery of candidate tumor biomarkers for treatment with intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. Sci Rep 2016;6:21591.

15. Royer B., Delroeux D., Guardiola E. et al. Improvement in intraperitoneal intraoperative cisplatin exposure based on pharmacokinetic analysis in patients with ovarian cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2008;61(3):415–21.

16. Alberts D.S., Liu P.Y., Hannigan E.V. et al. Intraperitoneal cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide versus intravenous cisplatin plus intravenous cyclophosphamide for stage III ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 1996;335(26):1950–5.

17. Markman M., Bundy B.N., Alberts D.S. 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(4):1001–7.

18. Armstrong D.K., Bundy B., Wenzel L. et al. Intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel in ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;354(1):34–43.

19. Piccart M.J., Speyer J.L., Markman M. et al. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy: technical experience at five institutions. Semin Oncol 1985;12(Suppl 4):90–6.

20. Walker J.L., Brady M.F., DiSilvestro P.A. et al. A phase III clinical trial of bevacizumab with IV versus IP chemotherapy in ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal carcinoma NCI-supplied agent(s): bevacizumab (NSC #704865, IND #7921) NCT01167712 a GOG/NRG trial (GOG 252). Presented at: 2016 SGO Annual Meeting. March 19–22, 2016. San Diego, CA.

21. Kristensen G., Perren T., Qian W. et al. Result of interim analysis of overall survival in the GCIG ICON7 phase III randomized trial of bevacizumab in women with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012;30(Suppl):abstr 5006.

22. Pinilla-Dominguez P., Richardson P., Robertsom J. et al. Nice guidance on bevacizumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin for the first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Lancet Oncol 2013;14(8):689–90.

23. Fujiwara K., Nagao S., Kigawa J. et al. Phase II study of intraperitoneal carboplatin with intravenous paclitaxel in patients with suboptimal residual epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer: a Sankai Gynecology Cancer Study Group Study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009;19(5): 834–7.

24. Kalloger S.E., Kobel M., Leung S. et al. Calculator for ovarian carcinoma subtype prediction. Mod Pathol 2011;24(4):512–21.

25. Winner K.R., Steinkamp M.P., Lee R.J. et al. Spatial modeling of drug delivery routes for treatment of disseminated ovarian cancer. Cancer Res 2016;76(6):1320–34.

26. Ledermann J., Harter P., Gourley C. et al. Olaparib maintenance therapy in platinumsensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. Lancet Oncol 2014;15(8):852–61.

27. Lesnock J.L., Darcy K.M., Tian C. et al. BRCA1 expression and improved survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with intraperitoneal cisplatin and paclitaxel: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Br J Cancer 20132;108(6):1231–7.

28. Jaaback K., Johnson N., Lawrie T.A. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy (administered into the peritoneal cavity) for advanced ovarian cancer improves both overall and disease-free survival. Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro-Oncology and Orphan Cancer Group. Available at: http://www.cochrane.org/CD005340/GYNAECA_intraperitoneal-chemotherapy-administeredperitoneal-cavity-advanced-ovarian-cancerimproves-both.