Abstract 538P
Background
CCS and HIPEC are used as therapeutic approaches for metastatic colorectal cancer patients. However, the combination of hepatectomy with CCS and HIPEC in patients with liver metastasis is emerging as a controversial topic in the medical field.
Methods
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central for studies comparing combined hepatectomy with CRS and HIPEC for metastatic liver and peritoneal tumors with HIPEC alone for peritoneal metastasis in patients with primary colorectal cancer. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software 4.3.2. We considered as significant p values < 0.05.
Results
We included 959 patients from 9 retrospective studies. The mean age in the combined group was 57.42 and in the group with HIPEC alone, it was 55.72 years. The mean peritoneal carcinomatosis index was 12.01 in the combined group and 9.29 in the control group. The mean overall survival (OS) was 27.99 months for the intervention and 36.89 for the control, and the mean disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 10.34 and 13.27 months, respectively. The mean follow-up in the studies was 43.35 months. The 5-year OS was not significantly different between the groups (HR 1.37; 95% CI 0.99–1.89; p = 0.06). Additionally, the intervention group showed a significantly higher length of ICU stay (MD 0.72 days; 95% CI 0.20–1.23; p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay (MD 6.71 days; 95% CI 3.24–10.17; p < 0.01), with an already expected increase in operative time (MD 53.44 minutes; 95% CI -3.91–110.79; p = 0.07). The intervention group also showed higher severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo >3) (33.33% vs. 18.72%; OR 2.51; 95% CI 1.50–4.18; p < 0.001). The recurrence rate was higher in the intervention group, even though it was not statistically significant (62.63% vs. 55.16%; OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.55–2.16; p = 0.803).
Conclusions
Our analysis showed that combining CRS and HIPEC with hepatectomy leads to a higher morbidity, and recurrence rate, with a lower mean OS and DFS. Therefore, combining CCS and HIPEC with hepatectomy should be avoided.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
532P - G-CSF secondary prophylaxis in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI): The GERCOR LONGBOARD study
Presenter: Jean-Baptiste Bachet
Session: Poster session 15
533P - First-line treatment in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A large real-world study
Presenter: debora basile
Session: Poster session 15
534P - Second-line treatment in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: The ELECTRA study
Presenter: Alessia Cordua
Session: Poster session 15
535P - Safety and efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors in elderly colorectal cancer patients: An Italian real-world multicenter experience
Presenter: Alessandra Boccaccino
Session: Poster session 15
536P - A randomized phase II/III trial comparing hepatectomy followed by mFOLFOX6 with hepatectomy alone for liver metastasis from colorectal cancer: Long-term results of JCOG0603
Presenter: Yukihide Kanemitsu
Session: Poster session 15
537P - Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy combined with fruquintinib and tislelizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: Updated findings from a single-arm, prospective phase II trial (RIFLE)
Presenter: Yajiie Chen
Session: Poster session 15
540P - Early treatment discontinuation (ETD) in dMMR/MSI-H metastastic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)
Presenter: Julien Taieb
Session: Poster session 15
541P - Nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) vs chemotherapy (chemo) as first-line (1L) treatment for microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Subgroup efficacy and expanded safety analyses from CheckMate 8HW
Presenter: Thierry André
Session: Poster session 15