Repeat isolated limb perfusion with TNFα and melphalan for recurrent limb melanoma after failure of previous perfusion
European Journal of Surgical Oncology , Volume 32 - Issue 3 p. 318- 324
Aim: To assess the effectiveness of isolated limb perfusion (ILP) with tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) and melphalan for recurrent or persistent melanoma lesions after previous ILP. Methods: Between 1978 and 2001, 21 patients (mean age 65, range 29-83 years) underwent repeat ILP for recurrent or persistent melanoma after a previous ILP. First ILPs had been performed with melphalan alone in 13 patients and with addition of TNFα in eight, for a median of nine lesions (interquartile (IQ) range 2-23 lesions). Repeat ILP was performed with TNFα and melphalan in all 21 patients for a median of nine lesions (IQ range 5-25 lesions). Median follow-up after repeat ILP was 18 months (IQ range 6-36 months). Results: Thirteen patients attained a complete response (CR) after repeat ILP compared to 11 of 17 with measurable lesions after the first ILP. Nine patients relapsed after CR. Median limb recurrence-free survival was 13 months. Fourteen patients had mild acute regional toxicity after repeat ILP compared to 18 fter the first ILP (n.s.). One patient underwent amputation for critical limb ischemia 10 months following repeat ILP. The limb salvage rate was 95%. Overall median survival was 62 months after CR compared to 13 months for those without CR (P=0.05). Conclusion: Repeat ILP with TNFα and melphalan is feasible after previous ILP with mild regional toxicity. The CR rate is relatively high and comparable to the first procedure with good limb recurrence-free survival and high limb salvage rate.
|European Journal of Surgical Oncology|
|Organisation||Department of Surgery|
Noorda, E.M, Vrouenraets, B.C, Nieweg, O.E, van Geel, A.N, Eggermont, A.M.M, & Kroon, B.B.R. (2006). Repeat isolated limb perfusion with TNFα and melphalan for recurrent limb melanoma after failure of previous perfusion. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 32(3), 318–324. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2005.10.009