Background/objectives: Despite the incremental improvement of survival with systemic therapy in metastatic gastric cancer (GC), the outcomes of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) remain poor. The limited effectiveness of systemic therapy is attributed to the blood–peritoneal barrier and anarchic intra-tumoral circulation, which reduce the penetration of systemic therapy. Approaches that incorporate intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy, in addition to systemic therapies, may be a viable alternate strategy. Therefore, we provide a review of biology of gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis and evidence for bidirectional iterative IP chemotherapy in GCPC. Methods: A comprehensive search in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed to find the relevant articles and ongoing phase II/III clinical trials in iterative IP chemotherapy in GCPC. Results: Intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy leverages the blood–peritoneal barrier to allow for the administration of high concentrations of chemotherapy directly to the peritoneal metastases, with a significant reduction in the systemic toxicity and enhanced drug efficacy against peritoneal metastasis. This pharmacokinetic advantage of IP chemotherapy can be further enhanced by additional measures such as heat or aerosolization. There are three IP chemotherapy approaches, namely, heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC), and normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC). Recent evidence suggests that iterative IP chemotherapy combined with systemic therapy may offer significant survival benefits for patients with peritoneal metastasis. Furthermore, bidirectional treatment approaches may also increase the chances of surgical resection and survival. Conclusions: IP chemotherapy plays a pivotal role in the management of gastric carcinomatosis, particularly in combination with cytoreduction in highly selected patients. The combination of systemic and regional control may increase the chances of surgical resection and may ultimately lead to significant survival benefits.

Purpose: Despite advances in systemic therapy, outcomes of patients with gastric cancer (GC) peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) remain poor, in part because of poor penetrance of systemic therapy into peritoneal metastasis due to the plasma-peritoneal barrier and anarchic intra-tumoral circulation. Hence, regional treatment approach with administration of chemotherapy directly into the peritoneal cavity (intraperitoneal, IP) under various conditions, combined with or without cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has remained an area of significant research interest. The purpose of this review is to provide high-level evidence for regional treatment approaches in the management of GCPC with limited peritoneal disease. Methods: A review of the current literature and ongoing clinical trials for regional IP therapies for GCPC was performed. Studies included in this review comprise of phase III randomized controlled trials, non-randomized phase II studies, high-impact retrospective studies, and active ongoing clinical trials for each available IP modality. Results: The three common IP approaches are heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC) and more recently introduced, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC). These IP approaches have been combined with systemic therapy and/or CRS with varying degrees of promising results, demonstrating evidence of improvements in survival rates and peritoneal disease control. Patient selection, optimization of systemic therapy, and completeness of cytoreduction have emerged as major factors influencing the design of contemporary and ongoing trials. Conclusion: IP chemotherapy has a clear role in the management of patients with GCPC, and when combined with CRS in appropriately selected patients has the potential to significantly improve survival. Ongoing and upcoming IP therapy clinical trials hold great promise to shape the treatment paradigm for GCPC.

Mical family enzymes are unusual actin regulators that prime filaments (F-actin) for disassembly via the site-specific oxidation of M44/M47. Filamentous actin acts as a substrate of Mical enzymes, as well as an activator of their NADPH oxidase activity, which leads to hydrogen peroxide generation. Mical enzymes are required for cytokinesis, muscle and heart development, dendritic pruning, and axonal guidance, among other processes. Thus, it is critical to understand how this family of actin regulators functions in different cell types. Vertebrates express six actin isoforms in a cell-specific manner, but MICALs’ impact on their intrinsic properties has never been systematically investigated. Our data reveal the differences in the intrinsic dynamics of Mical-oxidized actin isoforms. Furthermore, our results connect the intrinsic dynamics of actin isoforms and their redox state with the patterns of hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) generation by MICALs. We documented that the differential properties of actin isoforms translate into the distinct patterns of hydrogen peroxide generation in Mical/NADPH-containing systems. Moreover, our results establish a conceptual link between actin stabilization by interacting factors and its ability to activate MICALs’ NADPH oxidase activity. Altogether, our results suggest that the regulatory impact of MICALs may differ depending on the isoform-related identities of local actin networks.