Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29536296›Full record

Trial reportGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2018

A randomized phase II multicenter trial to explore efficacy of weekly intraperitoneal in comparison with intravenous paclitaxel administered immediately after gastrectomy to the patients with high risk of peritoneal recurrence: final results of the INPACT trial.

Naoto Takahashi, Mitsuro Kanda, Takaki Yoshikawa, Nobuhiro Takiguchi, Kazumasa Fujitani, Katsufumi Miyamoto, Yuichi Ito, Osamu Takayama, Motohiro Imano, Norio Mitsumori and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Integration of Genomic Biology Into Therapeutic Strategies of Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

13 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Naoto TakahashiDepartment of Surgery, Jikei University School of Medicine, Kashiwa Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Mitsuro KandaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan.
Takaki YoshikawaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Nobuhiro TakiguchiDivision of Gastroenterological Surgery, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, Japan.
Kazumasa FujitaniDepartment of Surgery, Osaka Prefectural General Medical Center, Osaka, Japan.
Katsufumi MiyamotoDepartment of Surgery, Hyogo Prefectural Awaji Medical Center, Sumoto, Japan.
Yuichi ItoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.
Osamu TakayamaDepartment of Surgery, Itami City Hospital, Itami, Japan.
Motohiro ImanoDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kinki University, Higashiosaka, Japan.
Norio MitsumoriDepartment of Surgery, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Junichi SakamotoTokai Central Hospital, Kakamigahara, Japan.
Satoshi MoritaDepartment of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.
Yasuhiro KoderaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II), Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan. ykodera@med.nagoya-u.ac.jp.
Jikei University School of Medicine · JPNagoya University · JPAichi Cancer Center · JPChiba Cancer Center · JPHyogo Prefectural Awaji Medical Center · JPItami City Hospital · JPKanagawa Prefectural Hospital Organization · JPKindai University · JPKyoto University · JPOsaka Prefectural Medical Center · JPTokai Central Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraperitoneal administration of paclitaxel had been considered a promising option to treat peritoneal metastasis, the most frequent pattern of recurrence in gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy, but its safety and efficacy after gastrectomy had not been fully explored.

methodsA phase II randomized comparison of postoperative intraperitoneal (IP) vs. intravenous (IV) paclitaxel was conducted. Patients with resectable gastric linitis plastica, cancer with minimal amount of peritoneal deposits (P1), or cancer positive for the peritoneal washing cytology (CY1) were eligible. After intraoperative confirmation of the above disease status and of resectability, patients were randomized to be treated either by the IP therapy (paclitaxel 60 mg/m

resultsOf the 86 patients who were randomized intraoperatively, 83 who actually started the protocol treatment were eligible for analysis (n = 39, IP group; n = 44, IV group). The 2-year survival rate of the IP and IV groups was 64.1% (95% CI 47.9-76.9) and 72.3% (95% CI 56.3-83.2%), respectively (p = 0.5731). The IP treatment did not confer significant overall or progression-free survival benefits, and was associated with particularly poor performance in patients with residual disease, including the CY1 P0 population.

conclusionsWe were unable to prove superiority of the IP paclitaxel over IV paclitaxel delivered after surgery to control advanced gastric cancer with high risk of peritoneal recurrence.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicGastrectomyHumansInfusions, IntravenousInfusions, ParenteralMaleMiddle AgedPaclitaxelPeritoneal NeoplasmsPostoperative CareStomach NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicPaclitaxelGastric cancerIntraperitoneal administrationPaclitaxelPeritoneal metastasis

Identifiers

PMID29536296
OpenAlexW2791307928

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.