Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31064330›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Establishment of a rat ovarian peritoneal metastasis model to study pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).

Leen Van de Sande, Wouter Willaert, Sarah Cosyns, Kaat De Clercq, Molood Shariati, Katrien Remaut, Wim Ceelen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A real-timePleura and peritoneum · 2019
    Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Leen Van de SandeLaboratory of Experimental Surgery, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0006-8104
Wouter WillaertLaboratory of Experimental Surgery, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Sarah CosynsLaboratory of Experimental Surgery, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Kaat De ClercqCancer Research Institute Ghent (CRIG), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Molood ShariatiLaboratory for General Biochemistry and Physical Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Katrien RemautCancer Research Institute Ghent (CRIG), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Wim CeelenLaboratory of Experimental Surgery, Department of Human Structure and Repair, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. Wim.Ceelen@UGent.be.
Ghent University · BEGhent University Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundpressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC), with or without electrostatic precipitation (ePIPAC), was recently introduced in the treatment of peritoneal metastases (PM) from ovarian cancer (OC). Preliminary clinical data are promising, but several methodological issues as well the anticancer efficacy of PIPAC remain unaddressed. Here, we propose a rat ePIPAC model that allows to study these issues in a clinically relevant, reproducible, and high throughput model.

methodslaparoscopy and PIPAC were established in healthy Wistar rats. Aerosol properties were measured using laser diffraction spectrometry based granulometric analyses. Electrostatic precipitation was accomplished using a commercially available generator (Ultravision™). A xenograft model of ovarian PM was created in athymic rats using intraperitoneal (IP) injection of SKOV-3 luciferase positive cells. Tumor growth was monitored weekly by in vivo bioluminescence imaging.

resultsPIPAC and electrostatic precipitation were well tolerated using a capnoperitoneum of 8 mmHg. All rats survived the (e)PIPAC procedure and no gas or aerosol leakage was observed over the entire procedure. With an injection pressure of 20 bar, granulometry showed a mean droplet diameter (D(v,0.5)) of 47 μm with a flow rate of 0.5 mL/s, and a significantly lower diameter (30 μm) when a flow rate of 0.8 mL/s was used. Experiments using IP injection of SKOV-3 luciferase positive cells showed that after IP injection of 20 × 10

conclusionswe propose a reproducible and efficient rodent model to study PIPAC and ePIPAC in OC xenografts with widespread PM. This model allows to characterize and optimize pharmacokinetic and biophysical parameters, and to evaluate the anti-cancer efficacy of (e)PIPAC treatment.

Indexed as

AerosolsAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsCell Line, TumorCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansInjections, IntraperitonealLaparoscopyOvarian NeoplasmsPeritoneal NeoplasmsPeritoneumPressureRatsRats, NudeRats, WistarAerosolsAntineoplastic AgentsePIPACIntraperitoneal drug deliveryLaparoscopic surgeryOvarian cancerPeritoneal metastasesPIPACRat xenograft

Identifiers

PMID31064330
PMCPMC6503553
OpenAlexW2944170856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.