INDEPSO-ISPSM Consensus on Peritoneal Malignancies: Management of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.

IF 3.2 Q2 ONCOLOGY
JCO Global Oncology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-05 DOI:10.1200/GO-24-00306
Swapnil Patel, Ramakrishnan Ayloor Sheshadri, Avanish Saklani, Somashekhar Sp, Rohit Kumar, Shivendra Singh, Vivek Sukumar, Aditi Bhatt
{"title":"INDEPSO-ISPSM Consensus on Peritoneal Malignancies: Management of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.","authors":"Swapnil Patel, Ramakrishnan Ayloor Sheshadri, Avanish Saklani, Somashekhar Sp, Rohit Kumar, Shivendra Singh, Vivek Sukumar, Aditi Bhatt","doi":"10.1200/GO-24-00306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This manuscript reports the results of the Indian Network for Development of Peritoneal Surface Oncology and Indian Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (INDEPSO-ISPSM) consensus that aimed to provide recommendations for some important aspects management of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) and address some issues unique to India.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The modified Delphi technique was used with two rounds of voting. There were 29 questions on nine main topics-the role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS), patient selection for CRS, preoperative workup, role of systemic chemotherapy (SC), CPM with other visceral metastases, molecular profile, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and other modalities of intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC), prophylactic/preventive strategies, and surveillances after CRS. A consensus was achieved if anyone option received >70 votes (strong consensus >90%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight surgical (n = 41) and gastrointestinal (n = 7) oncologists were invited; 44 agreed to participate. The response rate was 95.4% (42/44) in round 1 and 93.1% (41/44) in round 2. Overall, a consensus was achieved on 23/29 (79.3%) questions (strong consensus on 6/29 [20.6%]). The panel strongly recommended considering surgery for limited CPM with limited liver metastases (92.5%), not altering the surgical approach in patients with <i>KRAS</i> mutations (91.67%), and limiting the use of IPC for unresectable CPM outside clinical trials (95%). Adjuvant SC was recommended for all patients undergoing CRS (89.47%). CRS is a therapeutic option for selected patients with CPM including those with metachronous CPM (79.49) and signet ring cell cancers (76.92%). HIPEC was recommended outside clinical trials only for patients with peritoneal cancer index 11-15(80%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The panel recommended CRS for most indications but was very selective in recommending HIPEC and IPC outside clinical trials. These recommendations should be a useful resource in clinical decision making for clinicians treating CPM in India and regions with a similar sociodemographic background.</p>","PeriodicalId":14806,"journal":{"name":"JCO Global Oncology","volume":"10 ","pages":"e2400306"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Global Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/GO-24-00306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This manuscript reports the results of the Indian Network for Development of Peritoneal Surface Oncology and Indian Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (INDEPSO-ISPSM) consensus that aimed to provide recommendations for some important aspects management of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) and address some issues unique to India.

Methods: The modified Delphi technique was used with two rounds of voting. There were 29 questions on nine main topics-the role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS), patient selection for CRS, preoperative workup, role of systemic chemotherapy (SC), CPM with other visceral metastases, molecular profile, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and other modalities of intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC), prophylactic/preventive strategies, and surveillances after CRS. A consensus was achieved if anyone option received >70 votes (strong consensus >90%).

Results: Forty-eight surgical (n = 41) and gastrointestinal (n = 7) oncologists were invited; 44 agreed to participate. The response rate was 95.4% (42/44) in round 1 and 93.1% (41/44) in round 2. Overall, a consensus was achieved on 23/29 (79.3%) questions (strong consensus on 6/29 [20.6%]). The panel strongly recommended considering surgery for limited CPM with limited liver metastases (92.5%), not altering the surgical approach in patients with KRAS mutations (91.67%), and limiting the use of IPC for unresectable CPM outside clinical trials (95%). Adjuvant SC was recommended for all patients undergoing CRS (89.47%). CRS is a therapeutic option for selected patients with CPM including those with metachronous CPM (79.49) and signet ring cell cancers (76.92%). HIPEC was recommended outside clinical trials only for patients with peritoneal cancer index 11-15(80%).

Conclusion: The panel recommended CRS for most indications but was very selective in recommending HIPEC and IPC outside clinical trials. These recommendations should be a useful resource in clinical decision making for clinicians treating CPM in India and regions with a similar sociodemographic background.

INDEPSO-ISPSM关于腹膜恶性肿瘤的共识:结肠直肠腹膜转移的管理。
目的:本文报道了印度腹膜表面肿瘤发展网络和印度腹膜表面恶性肿瘤学会(INDEPSO-ISPSM)共识的结果,旨在为结肠直肠腹膜转移(CPM)患者的一些重要方面的管理提供建议,并解决印度特有的一些问题。方法:采用改进的德尔菲法进行两轮投票。共有29个问题,涉及9个主要主题:细胞减少手术(CRS)的作用、CRS的患者选择、术前检查、全身化疗(SC)的作用、CPM与其他内脏转移、分子谱、高温腹腔化疗(HIPEC)和其他腹腔化疗(IPC)方式、预防/预防策略以及CRS后的监测。如果任何选项获得>70票(强共识>90%),则达成共识。结果:共邀请48名外科肿瘤学家(n = 41)和胃肠道肿瘤学家(n = 7);44人同意参加。第1轮的有效率为95.4%(42/44),第2轮的有效率为93.1%(41/44)。总体而言,23/29(79.3%)的问题达成了共识(6/29(20.6%)的问题达成了强烈共识)。专家组强烈建议考虑手术治疗有限肝转移的有限CPM(92.5%),不改变KRAS突变患者的手术入路(91.67%),限制IPC在临床试验之外不可切除的CPM的使用(95%)。所有CRS患者推荐辅助SC(89.47%)。CRS是选择性CPM患者的治疗选择,包括非同步CPM(79.49%)和印戒细胞癌(76.92%)。在临床试验之外,HIPEC仅推荐用于腹膜癌指数11-15(80%)的患者。结论:专家组推荐CRS用于大多数适应症,但在临床试验之外推荐HIPEC和IPC时非常有选择性。这些建议对于印度和具有类似社会人口背景地区的临床医生治疗CPM的临床决策应该是有用的资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JCO Global Oncology
JCO Global Oncology Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
310
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信