Back

Consensus Guideline for the Management of Gastric Cancer with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases

PSM Writing Group, ; Turaga, K. K.

2024-04-21 oncology
10.1101/2024.04.10.24305456 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundGastric cancer with synchronous peritoneal metastases (GCPM) is a debilitating disease with limited treatment options. This manuscript describes an update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus Guidelines addressing the management of GCPM in line with most recent evidence. MethodsA clinical management pathway was updated through two rounds of a Delphi Consensus to assess agreement levels with pathway blocks. Supporting evidence underwent evaluation via a rapid literature review. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. ResultsOverall, level of evidence in this disease subset was low to moderate. Of 124 participants in the first round, 109 (88%) responded in the second round. Strong consensus (>90%) was achieved in 6/8 (75%) blocks in round I and II. A multidisciplinary preoperative assessment and diagnostic laparoscopy should be offered all patients, while patients with a high burden of disease or progression should undergo non-surgical management. Patients with stable/responsive disease and low peritoneal carcinomatosis index should subsequently be offered treatment with regional therapeutic interventions and cytoreductive surgery. In patients who are cytology positive, systemic therapy can be used to convert these patients to cytology negative, with subsequent surgery offered per the patients goals of care. Meta-analysis of observational and randomized control trials revealed a survival benefit with the addition of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to cytoreductive surgery (HR 0.52). ConclusionThe consensus-driven clinical pathway for GCPMs offers vital clinical guidance for practitioners. There is a growing body of high-quality evidence to support management strategies and future clinical trials are eagerly awaited.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.