Balloon catheter hypoxic pelvic perfusion with mitomycin C and melphalan for locally advanced tumours in the pelvic region: A phase I-II trial
Aims: To investigate the feasibility of hypoxic pelvic perfusion (HPP), using balloon catheter techniques as treatment modality for locally advanced pelvic malignancies. Methods: In a phase I-II study, 16 patients with various non-resectable pelvic tumours were treated with two HPP with MMC and melphalan, followed by radiotherapy (25 Gy) and surgical resection if feasible. Toxicity and procedure related complications were documented. Tumour responses were assessed by MRI or CT. Pain reductive effects were assessed by evaluation of pain registration forms. Results: HPP resulted in augmented regional drug concentrations with relatively low systemic levels. Some severe systemic toxicity was observed. One procedure related death occurred. Pain reduction effects were short-lived. Ten patients had radiological NC, two PD and one PR. In 11 patients surgical resection was performed, which was microscopically radical in six cases. Mean survival was 26.8 months (range 1-86). Conclusion: The seemingly favorable pharmacokinetic profiles observed with HPP in this and other studies can still lead to severe systemic toxicity. In terms of survival, local (re-)recurrence and pain reduction there seems no benefit of addition of HPP to pre-operative radiotherapy. HPP with MMC and melphalan, does not seem a therapeutic option in patients with locally advanced pelvic tumours.
|Keywords||Balloon catheter, Hypoxic perfusion, Melphalan, MMC, Non-resectable pelvic tumours, Pelvis, Phase I-II trial, Stop-flow|
|Persistent URL||dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2005.06.004, hdl.handle.net/1765/72763|
|Journal||European Journal of Surgical Oncology|
van IJken, M.G.A, van Etten, B, Guetens, G, de Bruijn, E.A, ten Hagen, T.L.M, Wiggers, T, & Eggermont, A.M.M. (2005). Balloon catheter hypoxic pelvic perfusion with mitomycin C and melphalan for locally advanced tumours in the pelvic region: A phase I-II trial. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 31(8), 897–904. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2005.06.004