Role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in combination with an intraperitoneal port system in the treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer

Background. The survival rate of patients with ovarian malignancies depends on the prevalence of the tumor process, the volume of surgical treatment, and the size of the residual tumor. At the first stage, an «aggressive» surgical tactic of removing all macroscopically determined tumor foci with subsequent antitumor drug therapy is recommended. However, the results of treatment remain unsatisfactory, which dictates the need to search for new methods of treatment.

Objective: to evaluate the effectiveness of implantable port systems for intraperitoneal chemotherapy administration in the treatment of patients with advanced stages of ovarian cancer.

Materials and methods. 37 cases of stage IIIC ovarian cancer were studied for the period 2018–2019. At the first stage of treatment, a cytoreductive operation was performed. At the second stage, the patients were randomly randomized into three groups: group 1 (n = 9) – installation of a port system + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy; group 2 (n = 11) – hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion followed by systemic intravenous chemotherapy; group 3 (n = 17) – control group, intravenous administration of antitumor drugs. The observation period is 27 months. In the study groups, the indicators of age distribution, the degree of malignancy of the neoplasm, the volume of the residual tumor, and the relapse-free survival were analyzed.

Results. Trends towards differences in progression-free survival were found in all study groups. In group 1, there was no relapse in all patients. In group 2, relapses amounted to 18.2 %, in group 3–23.5 %. G₃ ovarian cancer (6 (66.7 %) and 6 (54.5 %) cases, respectively) prevailed in groups 1 and 2; G₁ ovarian cancer (9 (52.9 %) cases) prevailed in group 3. Discussion. Features of the chemical composition and method of administration of the drug increase the effectiveness of local exposure to tumor cells. The introduction  of cytostatic agents into the abdominal cavity leads to minimal systemic toxicity, which exceeds the results of standard intravenous therapy.

Conclusion. An advantage in the relapse-free survival of patients after hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion in combination with an implantable port system was found in comparison with standard methods of treatment.

1. IARC – International Agency for Research on Cancer – Ovary – Global Cancer Observatory. Available at: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/25-Ovary-fact-sheet.pdf.

2. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2019 (morbidity and mortality). Eds.: Kaprin A.D., Starinsky V.V., Petrova G.V. Available at: http://www.oncology.ru/service/statistics/malignant_tumors/2019.pdf. (In Russ.).

3. Vazhenin A.V., Domozhirova A.S., Aksenova I.A. et al. Epidemiological features of the oncological situation and indicators of the state of oncological care to the population in the Chelyabinsk region in 2019: a statistical collection. Chelyabinsk: Press Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Center of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, 2020. 90 p. (In Russ.).

4. Zakharenko A.A., Belyaev M.A., Trushin A.A. et al. The first results of the use of laparoscopic aerosol intraperitoneal chemotherapy (PIPEC) in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with stomach cancer. Voprosy oncologii = Questions of Oncology 2018;2(64):222–7. (In Russ.).

5. Zakharenko A.A., Zaitsev D.A., Belyaev M.A. et al. Modern strategy of treatment of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Uchenye zapiski SPbGMU im. akad. I.P. Pavlova = Scientific notes of the St. Petersburg State Medical University named after Academician I.P. Pavlov 2017;4(24):7–12. (In Russ.).

6. Zakharenko A.A., Zaitsev D.A., Natkha A.S. et al. Intra-abdominal chemotherapy is a modern vision of the problem. Voprosy oncologii = Questions of Oncology 2017;5(63):708–13. (In Russ.).

7. Zakharenko A.A., Natkha A.S., Trushin A.A. et al. Aerosol intraperitoneal chemotherapy is a new effective method of treating peritoneal carcinomatosis. Rossijskij biomedicinskij zhurnal = Russian Biomedical Journal 2015;3(16):834–49. (In Russ.).

8. Tandelov R.K., Selchuk V.Yu., Morkhov K.Yu. et al. The role of cytoreductive operations in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (literature review). Sovremennaya onkologiya = Modern Oncology 2018;1(20):5–10. (In Russ.).

9. Kedrova A.G., Levakov S.A., Krasilnikov S.E. et al. Features of modern intraperitoneal therapy in patients with ovarian cancer. Opukholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy systemy = Tumors of Female Reproductive System 2016;1(12):85–93. (In Russ.).

10. Stepanov I.V., Paderov Yu.M., Afanasyev S.G. Peritoneal carcinomatosis. Sibirskij onkologicheskij zhurnal = Siberian Journal of Oncology 2014;(5):45–53. (In Russ.).

11. Tyulyandina A.S., Buidenok V.Yu., Zhordania K.I. et al. The first experience with intraabdominal chemotherapy in patients with disseminated ovarian cancer. Opukholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy systemy = Tumors of Female Reproductive System 2011;(3):99–104. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17650/1994-4098-2011-0-3-99-104.

12. Muallem M.Z., Gasimli K., Richter R. et al. AGO Score as a predictor of surgical outcome at secondary cytoreduction in patients with ovarian cancer. Anticancer Res 2015;35(6):3423–9.

13. Buys S.S., Partridge E., Black A. et al. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 2011;305(22):2295–303.

14. 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. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199612263352603.

15. 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.

16. Trimble E.L., Christian M.C. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for women with advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2006;100(1):3, 4.

17. Tewari D., Java J.J., Salani R. et al. Long-term survival advantage and prognostic factors associated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy treatment in advanced ovarian cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 2015;33(13):1460–6.

18. Walker J.L., Brady M.F., Wenzel L. et al. Randomized trial of intravenous versus intraperitoneal chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in advanced ovarian carcinoma: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 2019;37(16):1380–90.

19. Provencher D.M., Gallagher C.J., Parulekar W.R. et al. OV21/PETROC: a randomized gynecologic cancer intergroup phase II study of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and optimal debulking surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 2018;29(2):431–8.

20. Patent of the Russian Federation No. 2740628 “A transceiver. Technique for simultaneous installation of an intraperitoneal port system in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (HIPEC) that includes intraoperative installation of an intraperitoneal port system with the possibility of further normothermic chemoperfusion through the port system”. Available at: https://findpatent.ru/patent/274/2740628.html. (In Russ.).