Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32782488›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2020

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with cisplatin and doxorubicin or oxaliplatin for peritoneal metastasis from pancreatic adenocarcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.

Andrea Di Giorgio, Olivia Sgarbura, Stefano Rotolo, Carlo Alberto Schena, Cinzia Bagalà, Frediano Inzani, Andrea Russo, Vito Chiantera, Fabio Pacelli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Pancreatic cancer in 2025: Have we found a solution?World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. PIPAC for Gastrointestinal Malignancies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea Di GiorgioFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Peritoneum and Retroperitoneum Surgery, Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Olivia SgarburaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Montpellier Cancer Institute, Montpellier, Languedoc-Roussillon, France.
Stefano RotoloDepartment of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences (Di.Chir.On.S.), University of Palermo, Via del Vespro, 129, Palermo, 90127, Sicilia, Italy.
Carlo Alberto SchenaFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, General Surgery Unit, Roma, Lazio, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1136-1103
Cinzia BagalàFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Division of Medical Oncology, Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Frediano InzaniFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Anatomic Pathology Unit, Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Andrea RussoFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Institute of Intensive Care Medicine and Anesthesiology, Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Vito ChianteraDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Sicilia, Italy.
Fabio PacelliFoundation Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli - IRCCS, Peritoneum and Retroperitoneum Surgery, Roma, Lazio, Italy.
Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITUniversity of Palermo · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystemic chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CC) with peritoneal metastases (PM) is affected by several pharmacological shortcomings and low clinical efficacy. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is expected to maximize exposure of peritoneal nodules to antiblastic agents. This study aims to evaluate safety and efficacy of PIPAC for PM of PDAC and CC origin.

methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of consecutive PDAC and CC cases with PM treated with PIPAC at two European referral centers for peritoneal disease. We prospectively recorded from August 2016 to May 2019 demographic, clinical, surgical, and oncological data. We performed a feasibility and safety assessment and an efficacy analysis based on clinical and pathological regression.

resultsTwenty patients with PM from PDAC (14) and CC (six) underwent 45 PIPAC administrations. Cisplatin-doxorubicin or oxaliplatin were administered to eight and 12 patients, respectively. We experienced one intraoperative complication (small bowel perforation) and 18 grade 1-2 postoperative adverse events according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. A pathological regression was recorded in 50% of patients (62% in the cisplatin-doxorubicin cohort and 42% in the oxaliplatin one). Median survival from the first PIPAC was 9.7 and 10.9 months for PDAC and CC, respectively.

conclusionPIPAC resulted feasible and safe without relevant toxicity issues, with both cisplatin-doxorubicin and oxaliplatin. The pathological response observed supports the evidence of antitumoral activity. Despite the study limitations, these outcomes are encouraging, recommending PIPAC in prospective, controlled trials in the palliative setting or the first line chemotherapy for PM from PDAC and CC.

Indexed as

aerosol chemotherapycarcinomatosischolangiocarcinomalocoregional chemotherapypancreatic cancerperitoneal metastasesPIPAC

Identifiers

PMID32782488
PMCPMC7383654
OpenAlexW3045316564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.