{"title":"加压腹腔内气雾化疗治疗晚期胃癌伴腹膜转移:可行性、有效性和安全性的综合meta分析","authors":"Ruijian Chen, Zifeng Yang, Renjie Li, Yuesheng Yang, Jiabin Zheng, Junjiang Wang, Yong Li","doi":"10.1093/gastro/goaf040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for treating advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. Herein, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC in this patient population. The literature between January 2011 and February 2024 was comprehensively searched on the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The search, guided by the Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) framework, focused on studies reporting on the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC. Data were pooled by using log transformation (PLN) or Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation. Of the 451 initially identified studies, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 671 patients who underwent 1,357 PIPAC procedures. Our data analysis indicated that 32.6% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.5%-42.3%) completed three or more PIPAC procedures. Conversely, 2.3% of patients (95% CI, 0.6%-5%) either did not have access to or could not undergo PIPAC. The average rate of histological response across the included studies was 66.3% (95% CI, 59.1%-73.1%). Pooled results showed that 13.1% of patients (95% CI, 7.0%-20.7%) had reduced ascites after PIPAC, and 7.8% (95% CI, 4.8%-11.4%) became resectable. Adverse events were reported in 17.1% of patients (95% CI, 5.3%-33.4%), with 3.6% (95% CI, 1.4%-6.6%) experiencing severe adverse events (grade 3-5, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]). The pooled mortality related to PIPAC was 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%). The pooled proportions for 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year overall survival rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 69.2%-92.8%), 54.0% (95% CI, 45.7%-62.3%), and 20.0% (95% CI, 11.3%-30.3%), respectively. The average median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.3-14.0 months). Our study suggests that most patients can benefit from PIPAC treatment, such as improved quality of life and significantly longer median overall survival. Patients who received first-line chemotherapy prior to PIPAC and concomitant systemic chemotherapy during PIPAC treatment, and who underwent the PIPAC procedure on more than three occasions, exhibited a more favorable survival prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":54275,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Report","volume":"13 ","pages":"goaf040"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12167634/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: a comprehensive meta-analysis of feasibility, efficacy, and safety.\",\"authors\":\"Ruijian Chen, Zifeng Yang, Renjie Li, Yuesheng Yang, Jiabin Zheng, Junjiang Wang, Yong Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/gastro/goaf040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for treating advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. Herein, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC in this patient population. The literature between January 2011 and February 2024 was comprehensively searched on the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The search, guided by the Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) framework, focused on studies reporting on the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC. Data were pooled by using log transformation (PLN) or Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation. Of the 451 initially identified studies, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 671 patients who underwent 1,357 PIPAC procedures. Our data analysis indicated that 32.6% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.5%-42.3%) completed three or more PIPAC procedures. Conversely, 2.3% of patients (95% CI, 0.6%-5%) either did not have access to or could not undergo PIPAC. The average rate of histological response across the included studies was 66.3% (95% CI, 59.1%-73.1%). Pooled results showed that 13.1% of patients (95% CI, 7.0%-20.7%) had reduced ascites after PIPAC, and 7.8% (95% CI, 4.8%-11.4%) became resectable. Adverse events were reported in 17.1% of patients (95% CI, 5.3%-33.4%), with 3.6% (95% CI, 1.4%-6.6%) experiencing severe adverse events (grade 3-5, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]). The pooled mortality related to PIPAC was 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%). The pooled proportions for 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year overall survival rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 69.2%-92.8%), 54.0% (95% CI, 45.7%-62.3%), and 20.0% (95% CI, 11.3%-30.3%), respectively. The average median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.3-14.0 months). Our study suggests that most patients can benefit from PIPAC treatment, such as improved quality of life and significantly longer median overall survival. Patients who received first-line chemotherapy prior to PIPAC and concomitant systemic chemotherapy during PIPAC treatment, and who underwent the PIPAC procedure on more than three occasions, exhibited a more favorable survival prognosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastroenterology Report\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"goaf040\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12167634/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastroenterology Report\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goaf040\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Report","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goaf040","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: a comprehensive meta-analysis of feasibility, efficacy, and safety.
Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for treating advanced gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. Herein, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC in this patient population. The literature between January 2011 and February 2024 was comprehensively searched on the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The search, guided by the Population-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) framework, focused on studies reporting on the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of PIPAC. Data were pooled by using log transformation (PLN) or Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation. Of the 451 initially identified studies, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 671 patients who underwent 1,357 PIPAC procedures. Our data analysis indicated that 32.6% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.5%-42.3%) completed three or more PIPAC procedures. Conversely, 2.3% of patients (95% CI, 0.6%-5%) either did not have access to or could not undergo PIPAC. The average rate of histological response across the included studies was 66.3% (95% CI, 59.1%-73.1%). Pooled results showed that 13.1% of patients (95% CI, 7.0%-20.7%) had reduced ascites after PIPAC, and 7.8% (95% CI, 4.8%-11.4%) became resectable. Adverse events were reported in 17.1% of patients (95% CI, 5.3%-33.4%), with 3.6% (95% CI, 1.4%-6.6%) experiencing severe adverse events (grade 3-5, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]). The pooled mortality related to PIPAC was 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.5%). The pooled proportions for 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year overall survival rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 69.2%-92.8%), 54.0% (95% CI, 45.7%-62.3%), and 20.0% (95% CI, 11.3%-30.3%), respectively. The average median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.3-14.0 months). Our study suggests that most patients can benefit from PIPAC treatment, such as improved quality of life and significantly longer median overall survival. Patients who received first-line chemotherapy prior to PIPAC and concomitant systemic chemotherapy during PIPAC treatment, and who underwent the PIPAC procedure on more than three occasions, exhibited a more favorable survival prognosis.
期刊介绍:
Gastroenterology Report is an international fully open access (OA) online only journal, covering all areas related to gastrointestinal sciences, including studies of the alimentary tract, liver, biliary, pancreas, enteral nutrition and related fields. The journal aims to publish high quality research articles on both basic and clinical gastroenterology, authoritative reviews that bring together new advances in the field, as well as commentaries and highlight pieces that provide expert analysis of topical issues.