Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24890254›Full record

SynthesisGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2015

A systematic review and meta-analysis of gastric cancer treatment in patients with positive peritoneal cytology.

Carlos Suhady Cabalag, Steven Tuck Foo Chan, Yui Kaneko, Cuong Phu Duong

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. International consensus on the management of metastatic gastric cancer: step by step in the foggy landscape : Bertinoro Workshop, November 2022.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Mapping the global research landscape on nutritional support for patients with gastrointestinal malignancy: visualization analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Recent developments and innovations in gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carlos Suhady CabalagDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 7 St. Andrews Place, East Melbourne, VIC, 3002, Australia, carloscabalag@gmail.com.
Steven Tuck Foo Chan
Yui Kaneko
Cuong Phu Duong
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastric cancer patients with positive peritoneal cytology as the only marker of metastatic disease have poor prognoses. There is no universal consensus on the most appropriate treatment regimen for this particular patient group. We reviewed and analyzed published data to determine the optimal treatment regimen for patients with peritoneal cytology-positive gastric adenocarcinomas. Six electronic databases were explored [PubMed, Cochrane (Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials), PROSPERO, DARE, and EMBASE]. The primary outcome was overall survival with secondary outcomes including patterns of recurrence and treatment-related morbidity. Six studies were included for data extraction. There was no significant heterogeneity between studies. The use of S1 monotherapy was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32-0.70; p = 0.0002). Intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IIPC) with adjuvant chemotherapy showed a trend toward improvement in overall survival (HR 0.70; 9 % CI 0.47-1.04; p = 0.08). A recent randomized controlled trial examining extensive intraperitoneal lavage (EIPL) with IIPC showed a significant improvement in overall survival (5-year overall survival, 43.8% for EIPL-IPC group compared with 4.6% for IPC group). However, these promising results need to be validated in larger prospective randomized trials.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDrug CombinationsHumansIntraoperative PeriodNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOxonic AcidPeritoneal LavageStomach NeoplasmsTegafurTreatment OutcomeDrug CombinationsOxonic AcidS 1 (combination)Tegafur

Identifiers

PMID24890254
OpenAlexW1973534213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.