Isolated limb infusion with melphalan and actinomycin D for melanoma: A systematic review

Authors

  • Hidde M. Kroon MD, PhD,

    1. Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Anna M. Huismans MD,

    1. Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Peter C.A. Kam MD,

    1. Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    2. Discipline of Anaesthetics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    3. Department of Anaesthetics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • John F. Thompson MD

    Corresponding author
    1. Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    2. Discipline of Surgery, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    3. Department of Melanoma and Surgical Oncology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
    • Correspondence to: John F. Thompson, MD, Melanoma Institute Australia, 40 Rocklands Road, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia.

      Fax: +61-2-9954-9435. E-mail: John.Thompson@melanoma.org.au

    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Isolated limb infusion (ILI) was developed as a simplified and minimally invasive alternative to isolated limb perfusion (ILP) to treat unresectable limb melanoma. A number of centers around the world have reported their results using this procedure. In this study a systematic review of reported ILI experiences was undertaken. A literature search was conducted according to the guidelines for systematic reviews in order to select eligible papers reporting limb toxicity and response rates following ILI using melphalan and actinomycin D to treat limb melanoma. A total of 576 patients from seven publications were included. Regional toxicity following ILI was low: no visible effect of the treatment or slight erythema or edema was observed in 79% of the patients, while considerable erythema and/or edema with blistering was experienced by 19%. In 2% there was a threatened or actual compartment syndrome. No procedure-related amputation was reported. Complete response occurred in 33% of the patients and partial response in 40%, an overall response rate of 73%. Stable disease and progressive disease were achieved in 14% and 13% of the patients, respectively. This first systematic review of ILI procedures using melphalan and actinomycin D indicates that regional toxicity was generally low, with satisfactory response rates. When comparing ILI and ILP, it must be borne in mind that ILI is often performed in significantly older patients and in patients with higher stages of disease, which decreases the likelihood of a favorable response. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014 109:348–351. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Ancillary