Citations

Juvenile-onset recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (JoRRP) is driven by human papillomavirus (HPV) low-risk strains and is associated with significant morbidity. While previous studies of 2D cultures have shed light on disease pathogenesis and demonstrated the utility of personalized medicine approaches, monolayer cultures lack the 3D tissue architecture and physiology of stratified, sequentially differentiated mucosal epithelium important in RRP disease pathogenesis. Herein we describe the establishment of JoRRP-derived primary cell populations that retain HPV genomes and viral gene expression in culture. These were directly compared to cells from matched adjacent non-diseased tissue, given the known RRP patient-to-patient variability. JoRRP papilloma versus control cells displayed decreased growth at subconfluency, with a switch to increased growth after reaching confluency, suggesting relative resistance to cell-cell contact and/or differentiation. The same papilloma cells grown as 3D organotypic rafts harbored hyperproliferation as compared to controls, with increased numbers of proliferating basal cells and inappropriately replicating suprabasal cells, mimicking phenotypes in the patient biopsies from which they were derived. These complementary model systems provide novel opportunities to elucidate disease mechanisms at distinct stages in JoRRP progression and to identify diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic factors to personalize patient management and treatment.

ABSTRACT The mariner (myo7aa−/−) mutant is a zebrafish model for Usher syndrome type 1 (USH1). To further characterize hair cell synaptic elements in myo7aa−/− mutants, we focused on the ribbon synapse and evaluated ultrastructure, number and distribution of immunolabeled ribbons, and postsynaptic densities. By transmission electron microscopy, we determined that myo7aa−/− zebrafish have fewer glutamatergic vesicles tethered to ribbon synapses, yet maintain a comparable ribbon area. In myo7aa−/− hair cells, immunolocalization of Ctbp2 showed fewer ribbon-containing cells in total and an altered distribution of Ctbp2 puncta compared to wild-type hair cells. myo7aa−/− mutants have fewer postsynaptic densities – as assessed by MAGUK immunolabeling – compared to wild-type zebrafish. We quantified the circular swimming behavior of myo7aa−/− mutant fish and measured a greater turning angle (absolute smooth orientation). It has previously been shown that L-type voltage-gated calcium channels are necessary for ribbon localization and occurrence of postsynaptic density; thus, we hypothesized and observed that L-type voltage-gated calcium channel agonists change behavioral and synaptic phenotypes in myo7aa−/− mutants in a drug-specific manner. Our results indicate that treatment with L-type voltage-gated calcium channel agonists alter hair cell synaptic elements and improve behavioral phenotypes of myo7aa−/− mutants. Our data support that L-type voltage-gated calcium channel agonists induce morphological changes at the ribbon synapse – in both the number of tethered vesicles and regarding the distribution of Ctbp2 puncta – shift swimming behavior and improve acoustic startle response.

Introduction: Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) such as decitabine or azacitidine are established standard of care for the treatment of MDS and CMML. The oral bioavailability of these agents has been limited due to rapid degradation by cytidine deaminase (CDA) in the gut and liver, hence requiring intravenous infusion or subcutaneous injections daily for 5-7 days every month (m). This parenteral administration requirement adds significant burden to older cancer patients due to daily time commitment and travel to treatment centers. It also increases exposure to and infection risk with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oral decitabine 35 mg/cedazuridine 100 mg (ASTX727) is an oral fixed dose combination drug of decitabine and the CDA inhibitor cedazuridine that have shown 99% (90% CI 93% to 106%) equivalent exposure to standard dose IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 in a randomized cross-over study (Garcia-Manero et al, ASH 2019). Here, we present the clinical efficacy and safety results of oral decitabine/cedazuridine from 133 patient study in MDS and CMML (ASTX727-02 ASCERTAIN study). Methods: We used a randomized cross over design where patients were randomized in the first 2 cycles 1:1 to either Sequence A: decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg in Cycle 1 followed by IV decitabine at 20 mg/m2 in Cycle 2, or Sequence B: IV decitabine in Cycle 1 followed by oral decitabine/cedazuridine in Cycle 2 to do an intra-patient comparison of decitabine PK (primary PK endpoint: decitabine AUC equivalence over 5 days of dosing). Cycles were repeated every 28 days. All patients received oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all subsequent cycles from Cycle 3 onwards until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were eligible as per the FDA-approved label of IV decitabine (MDS patients by FAB classification including CMML, or MDS IPSS Intermediate-1, 2 or high-risk patients). Clinical endpoints were best response as assessed by an independent expert panel according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 response criteria, transfusion independence for at least 8 or 16 consecutive weeks, overall survival, and safety. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 4.03. Results: 138 subjects were randomized, of whom 133 were treated on study. The median age was 71.0 years (range 44-88), 65% were male, 88% MDS and 12% CMML, 43% were either red blood cells (RBCs) or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 25% had poor-risk cytogenetics, and 42% had baseline bone marrow blasts >5%. At the data cutoff for the response analysis, the median duration of follow up was 12.6 m (range 9.3 to 20.5 m) with median number of treatment cycles of 8 (range 1 to 18). Of the 133 treated patients the best response was complete response (CR) in 28 patients (21%; 95% CI 15-29%), marrow (m)CR with hematological improvement (HI) in 20 patients (15%), mCR without HI in 23 patients (17.3%), and HI in 10 patients (7.5%) for an overall objective response (CR+mCR+HI) in 81 patients (61%; 95% CI 52-69%). Median duration of CR was 7.5 m (range 1.6 to 17.5 m), and median time to CR was 4.3 m (range 2.1 to 15.2 m). Of the 133 treated patients 27 (20%) went on to receive allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. Of the 57 patients who were either RBCs or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 30 (53%) became transfusion independent for both RBCs and platelets for at least 8 consecutive weeks, and 19 (33%) were both RBCs and platelets transfusion independent for at least 16 consecutive weeks. Median survival has not been reached. Most common Treatment-Emergent AEs of Grade ≥3 regardless of causality were neutropenia in 51.5%, thrombocytopenia in 50%, anemia in 40%, febrile neutropenia in 26%, leukopenia in 21%, pneumonia in 12%, and sepsis in 7% of patients treated with oral decitabine/cedazuridine (excluding the IV decitabine cycle). Summary/Conclusions: Efficacy and safety from oral decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg daily for 5 days every 28 days are consistent with clinical data from standard IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 daily for 5 days. Oral decitabine/cedazuridine is the only oral HMA with systemic exposure equivalent to its injectable drug. Further investigation of oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all-oral combination studies is warranted and underway. Disclosures Savona: BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ryvu: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Patents & Royalties; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Griffiths:Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc: Honoraria; Persimmune: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex Pharmceuticals: Research Funding. Zeidan:CCITLA: Other; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria. Patel:DAVA Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; France Foundation: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy. Keating:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Taiho: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Fazal:Jansen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopham: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Glaxosmith Kline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Odenike:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals, NS Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Oncology, Oncotherapy, Agios, CTI/Baxalta, Aprea: Other: Institutional research funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Institutional research funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Impact Biomedicines: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; BioAscend: Honoraria; Delta Fly: Honoraria; Ascentage: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; Aptitute Health: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Oxford Biomedical: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive biotechnologies: Honoraria. DeZern:MEI: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Amphivena: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Trovagene: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Jasper Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Helsinn: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy. Busque:Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Wells:Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Leber:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda/Palladin: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Treadwell: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Keer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Garcia-Manero:Acceleron Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amphivena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Helsinn Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

AbstractBackgroundWhile parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC.MethodsPatients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000–2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0‐1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p = .001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p < .001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p = .007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p = .014) than non‐LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2‐year OS 62% vs. 79%, p < .001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10–11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69–12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21–9.85) (all p < .05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2‐year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%).ConclusionsAs CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.

AbstractBackgroundVariations in care have been demonstrated both within and among institutions in many clinical settings. By standardizing perioperative practices, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways reduce variation in perioperative care. We sought to characterize the variation in cytoreductive surgery (CRS)/heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) perioperative practices among experienced US medical centers.MethodsData from the US HIPEC Collaborative represents a retrospective multi‐institutional cohort study of CRS and CRS/HIPEC procedures performed from 12 major academic institutions. Patient characteristics and perioperative practices were reported and compared. Institutional variation was analyzed using hierarchical mixed‐effects linear (continuous outcomes) or logistic (binary outcomes) regression models.ResultsA total of 2372 operations were included. CRS/HIPEC was performed most commonly for appendiceal histologies (64.2%). The rate of complications (overall 56.3%, range: 31.8‐70.9) and readmissions (overall 20.6%, range: 8.9‐33.3) varied by institution (P < .001). Institution‐level variation in perioperative practice patterns existed among measured ERAS pathway process/outcomes (P < .001). The percentages of variation with each process/outcome measure attributable solely to institutional practices ranged from 0.6% to 66.6%.ConclusionsSignificant variation exists in the perioperative care of patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC at major US academic institutions. These findings provide a strong rationale for the investigation of best practices in CRS/HIPEC patients.

Abstract Introduction: Male breast cancer (BCa) is a rare disease accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancers (BC) and 1% of all cancers in males. The clinical management is largely extrapolated from female BCa. Few studies have examined the genomic landscape of male BCas, with six male BCas included in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Familial studies of male BCas have shown genomic changes similar to female BCa, while a larger targeted sequencing study of 59 male breast cancers identified recurrent mutations affecting PIK3CA and GATA3. To date, there is still limited information regarding the genomic landscape of male BCas; particularly in the context of identifying targeted treatments. To reveal genomic changes that characterize male BCas in the context of known cancer driver genes linked to prognosis and targeted agents, we performed a targeted sequencing study on 248 male BCas from the International Male Breast Cancer Program. Methods: 248 primary M0, ER+ve, HER2-ve male BCas enrolled in the Part 1 (retrospective joint analysis) International Male Breast Cancer Program of 1483 patients diagnosed between 1990-2010 (Cardoso et al. Annals of Oncology, 2018) were processed for nucleic acid extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissues. Using the Thermo Fisher Scientific Oncomine Comprehensive Assay v3 (OCAv3), a validated targeted sequencing panel currently used in the NCI-MATCH trial (NCT02465060), we evaluated mutational and copy number variations (CNVs) of genes that are prognostic or predictive to targeted therapies currently in use in the clinic or late-stage clinical trials. The OCAv3 DNA pan-cancer panel assays 115 genes for determining mutational status (48 full coding and 67 hotspot) as well as copy-number assessment in 43 genes. The OCAv3 uses Ampliseq-based technology linked to the Oncomine NGS workflow to identify actionable mutations and CNVs Results: Of the 248 samples assayed, 216 passed strict quality control parameters (87.1%). Using the Oncomine NGS workflow, actionable mutations at ≥5% variant allele frequency (VAF) were most frequently identified in PIK3CA (29.2%), BRCA2 (11.1%), NF1 (11.6%), indels in TP53 (10.6%), ATR (5.6%), ATRX (5.1%), indel BRCA2 (5.1%), TP53 point mutations (4.6%), MET (4.6%), ATM (4.6%), NOTCH2 (4.6%), CHEK1 (4.2%), FANCI (4.2%), PTEN (3.2%) with a number of additional genes identified at lower frequencies. Gene amplifications were most frequently detected in MYC (24.5%), FGFR1 (14.8%), CCND1 (12%), FGF3 (9.7%), FGF19 (9.7%), MDM2 (6.5%), CDK4 (1.4%), FGFR3, MDM4, ERBB2 (0.9% each), and FLT3, AR, MYCL, CDK6, IGF1R, FGFR4, KRAS, AKT3 and ESR1 (0.5% each). Although the results here describe the mutations and copy-number changes deemed to be actionable, further analysis of all non-actionable somatic mutations and CNVs will be presented and compared to female BCas previously assayed using the same panel. Conclusion: In this targeted sequencing study of the largest series of male BCas to our knowledge, we have revealed that PIK3CA continues to be a frequently altered gene in both male and female BCas. However, there is an enrichment of mutations in genes related to DNA repair in male BCs. Interestingly, while MYC is commonly amplified in female BCa, a higher frequency of amplified cases were seen in male BCas, in contrast to female BCas. Together with our previously generated transcriptional profiling data in this data set, we believe that both common and unique biological processes comprising male and female BCas will ultimately improve their clinical management and move towards the goal of precision medicine. This work has been funded by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF). Citation Format: Jane Bayani, Coralie Poncet, Cheryl Crozier, Quang M Trinh, Megan Hopkins, Aime Lambert Uwimana, Tammy Piper, Carrie Cunningham, Monika Sobol, Stefan Aebi, Kim Benstead, Oliver Bogler, Lissandra Dal Lago, Florentine Hilbers, Ingrid Hedenfalk, Larissa Korde, Barbro Linderholm, John Martens, Lavinia Middleton, Melissa Murray, Catherine Kelly, Cecilia Nilsson, Monika Nowaczyk, Stephanie Peeters, Aleksandra Peric, Peggy Porter, Carolien Schröder, Isabel T Rubio, Kathryn J Ruddy, Christi van Asperen, Danielle Van Den Weyngaert, Carolien HM van Deurzen, Elise van Leeuwen-Stok, Joanna Vermeij, Eric Winer, Lincoln D Stein, Sharon H Giordano, Fatima Cardoso, John MS Bartlett. The genomic landscape of male breast cancers using the oncomine comprehensive assay for actionable mutations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-10-03.

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with improved survival for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CR-PM). However, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to CRS-HIPEC is poorly understood. A retrospective review of adult patients with CR-PM who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC from 2000–2017 was performed. Among 298 patients who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC, 196 (65.8%) received NAC while 102 (34.2%) underwent surgery first (SF). Patients who received NAC had lower peritoneal cancer index score (12.1 + 7.9 vs. 14.3 + 8.5, p = 0.034). There was no significant difference in grade III/IV complications (22.4% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.650), readmission (32.3% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.114), or 30-day mortality (1.5% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.411) between groups. NAC patients experienced longer overall survival (OS) (median 32.7 vs. 22.0 months, p = 0.044) but similar recurrence-free survival (RFS) (median 13.8 vs. 13.0 months, p = 0.456). After controlling for confounding factors, NAC was not independently associated with improved OS (OR 0.80) or RFS (OR 1.04). Among patients who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC for CR-PM, the use of NAC was associated with improved OS that did not persist on multivariable analysis. However, NAC prior to CRS+/-HIPEC was a safe and feasible strategy for CR-PM, which may aid in the appropriate selection of patients for aggressive cytoreductive surgery.