Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34996419›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2022

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) vs CRS alone for treatment of endometrial cancer with peritoneal metastases: a multi-institutional study from PSOGI and BIG RENAPE groups.

Manuel Gomes David, Naoual Bakrin, Julia Salleron, Marie Christine Kaminsky, Jean Marc Bereder, Jean Jacques Tuech, Kuno Lehmann, Sanket Mehta, Olivier Glehen, Frédéric Marchal

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Manuel Gomes DavidDépartement de Chirurgie Oncologique, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Université de Lorraine, 6 Avenue de Bourgogne, 54519, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France. m.gomesdavid@nancy.unicancer.fr.
Naoual BakrinService de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne, Hôpital Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Julia SalleronInstitut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Cellule Data Biostatistiques, Université de Lorraine, 54519, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Marie Christine KaminskyDépartement d'oncologie, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Université de Lorraine, 54519, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Jean Marc BerederNice University Hospital, Nice, France.
Jean Jacques TuechRouen University Hospital, Rouen, France.
Kuno LehmannZurich University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Sanket MehtaSaiffee Hospital, Mumbai, India.
Olivier GlehenService de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne, Hôpital Lyon Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Frédéric MarchalDépartement de Chirurgie Oncologique, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Université de Lorraine, 6 Avenue de Bourgogne, 54519, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
Hospices Civils de Lyon · FRUniversité de Lorraine · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut de Cancérologie de Lorraine · FRSaifee Hospital · INUniversité de Rouen Normandie · FRUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the benefit of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the treatment of endometrial peritoneal carcinomatosis compared to CRS alone.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective multicentre study of patients from experienced centres in treating peritoneal malignancies from 2002 to 2015. Patients who underwent surgery for peritoneal evolution of endometrial cancer (EC) were included. Two groups of 30 women were matched and compared: "CRS + HIPEC" which used HIPEC after CRS, and "CRS only" which did not use HIPEC. We analysed clinical, pathologic and treatment data for patients with peritoneal metastases from EC. The outcome measures were morbidity, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).

resultsIn "CRS plus HIPEC" group, 96.7% of women were treated for recurrence, while in "CRS only" 83.3 were treated for primary disease. There was no significant difference between Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index at laparotomy or Completeness of Cytoreduction score. Grade III and IV complications rates did not significantly differ between "CRS plus HIPEC" group and "CRS only" group (20.7% vs 20.7%, p = 0.739). Survival analysis showed no statistical difference between both groups. Median OS time was 19.2 months in "CRS plus HIPEC" group and 29.7 months in "CRS only" group (p = 0.606). Median PFS survival time was 10.7 months in "CRS plus HIPEC" group and 13.1 months in "CRS only" group (p = 0.511).

conclusionThe use of HIPEC combined to CRS did not have any significance as regard the DFS and OS over CRS alone in patients with primary or recurrent peritoneal metastasis of endometrial cancer.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsHyperthermia, InducedPeritoneal NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCombined Modality TherapyCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateCarcinomatosisCytoreductive surgeryEndometrial cancerHIPECPeritoneal metastasis

Identifiers

PMID34996419
PMCPMC8742414
OpenAlexW4225375561

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.