Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: Failure analysis following cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)

D. Baratti, S. Kusamura, A. D. Cabras, P. Dileo, B. Laterza, M. Deraco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Improved survival has been reported for diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM) treated by cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The issue of treatment failure has never been extensively addressed. The present study assessed the failure pattern, management, and outcome of progressive DMPM following comprehensive treatment. Clinical data on 70 patients with DMPM undergoing cytoreduction and HIPEC were prospectively collected; after a median follow-up of 43 months, disease progression occurred in 38 patients. Progressive disease distribution in 13 abdominopelvic regions was analyzed. In 28 patients undergoing adequate cytoreduction (residual tumor 2.5 mm), clinicopathological factors correlating to disease progression in each region were investigated. Median time to progression was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-35.9]. Median survival from progression was 8 months (95% CI 4-16.2). The failure pattern was categorized as peritoneal progression (n = 31), liver metastases (n = 1), abdominal lymph-node involvement (n = 2), pleural seeding (n = 4). Small bowel was the single site most commonly involved (n = 27). Residual tumor 2.5 mm (versus no visible) was the only independent risk factor for disease progression in epigastric region (P = 0.047), upper ileum (P = 0.029), upper jejunum (P = 0.034), and lower jejunum (P = 0.002). Progressive disease was treated with second HIPEC in 3 patients, debulking in 4, systemic chemotherapy in 16, and supportive care in 15. At multivariate analysis, time to progression

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)463-472
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
Volume16
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2009

Fingerprint

Disease Progression
Drug Therapy
Residual Neoplasm
Jejunum
Confidence Intervals
Survival
Treatment Failure
Ileum
Multivariate Analysis
Lymph Nodes
Neoplasm Metastasis
Malignant Mesothelioma
Liver
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma : Failure analysis following cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). / Baratti, D.; Kusamura, S.; Cabras, A. D.; Dileo, P.; Laterza, B.; Deraco, M.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 02.2009, p. 463-472.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e54fcf6e4ae04fa1a76e3eeb7d452d04,
title = "Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: Failure analysis following cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)",
abstract = "Improved survival has been reported for diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM) treated by cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The issue of treatment failure has never been extensively addressed. The present study assessed the failure pattern, management, and outcome of progressive DMPM following comprehensive treatment. Clinical data on 70 patients with DMPM undergoing cytoreduction and HIPEC were prospectively collected; after a median follow-up of 43 months, disease progression occurred in 38 patients. Progressive disease distribution in 13 abdominopelvic regions was analyzed. In 28 patients undergoing adequate cytoreduction (residual tumor 2.5 mm), clinicopathological factors correlating to disease progression in each region were investigated. Median time to progression was 9 months [95{\%} confidence interval (CI) 1.6-35.9]. Median survival from progression was 8 months (95{\%} CI 4-16.2). The failure pattern was categorized as peritoneal progression (n = 31), liver metastases (n = 1), abdominal lymph-node involvement (n = 2), pleural seeding (n = 4). Small bowel was the single site most commonly involved (n = 27). Residual tumor 2.5 mm (versus no visible) was the only independent risk factor for disease progression in epigastric region (P = 0.047), upper ileum (P = 0.029), upper jejunum (P = 0.034), and lower jejunum (P = 0.002). Progressive disease was treated with second HIPEC in 3 patients, debulking in 4, systemic chemotherapy in 16, and supportive care in 15. At multivariate analysis, time to progression",
author = "D. Baratti and S. Kusamura and Cabras, {A. D.} and P. Dileo and B. Laterza and M. Deraco",
year = "2009",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-008-0219-1",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "463--472",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York LLC",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma

T2 - Failure analysis following cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)

AU - Baratti, D.

AU - Kusamura, S.

AU - Cabras, A. D.

AU - Dileo, P.

AU - Laterza, B.

AU - Deraco, M.

PY - 2009/2

Y1 - 2009/2

N2 - Improved survival has been reported for diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM) treated by cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The issue of treatment failure has never been extensively addressed. The present study assessed the failure pattern, management, and outcome of progressive DMPM following comprehensive treatment. Clinical data on 70 patients with DMPM undergoing cytoreduction and HIPEC were prospectively collected; after a median follow-up of 43 months, disease progression occurred in 38 patients. Progressive disease distribution in 13 abdominopelvic regions was analyzed. In 28 patients undergoing adequate cytoreduction (residual tumor 2.5 mm), clinicopathological factors correlating to disease progression in each region were investigated. Median time to progression was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-35.9]. Median survival from progression was 8 months (95% CI 4-16.2). The failure pattern was categorized as peritoneal progression (n = 31), liver metastases (n = 1), abdominal lymph-node involvement (n = 2), pleural seeding (n = 4). Small bowel was the single site most commonly involved (n = 27). Residual tumor 2.5 mm (versus no visible) was the only independent risk factor for disease progression in epigastric region (P = 0.047), upper ileum (P = 0.029), upper jejunum (P = 0.034), and lower jejunum (P = 0.002). Progressive disease was treated with second HIPEC in 3 patients, debulking in 4, systemic chemotherapy in 16, and supportive care in 15. At multivariate analysis, time to progression

AB - Improved survival has been reported for diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM) treated by cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The issue of treatment failure has never been extensively addressed. The present study assessed the failure pattern, management, and outcome of progressive DMPM following comprehensive treatment. Clinical data on 70 patients with DMPM undergoing cytoreduction and HIPEC were prospectively collected; after a median follow-up of 43 months, disease progression occurred in 38 patients. Progressive disease distribution in 13 abdominopelvic regions was analyzed. In 28 patients undergoing adequate cytoreduction (residual tumor 2.5 mm), clinicopathological factors correlating to disease progression in each region were investigated. Median time to progression was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-35.9]. Median survival from progression was 8 months (95% CI 4-16.2). The failure pattern was categorized as peritoneal progression (n = 31), liver metastases (n = 1), abdominal lymph-node involvement (n = 2), pleural seeding (n = 4). Small bowel was the single site most commonly involved (n = 27). Residual tumor 2.5 mm (versus no visible) was the only independent risk factor for disease progression in epigastric region (P = 0.047), upper ileum (P = 0.029), upper jejunum (P = 0.034), and lower jejunum (P = 0.002). Progressive disease was treated with second HIPEC in 3 patients, debulking in 4, systemic chemotherapy in 16, and supportive care in 15. At multivariate analysis, time to progression

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=59449109253&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=59449109253&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-008-0219-1

DO - 10.1245/s10434-008-0219-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 19082859

AN - SCOPUS:59449109253

VL - 16

SP - 463

EP - 472

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

IS - 2

ER -