Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35615149›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Cytoreductive Surgery in Ovarian Cancer: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses.

Amine Souadka, Hajar Essangri, Mohammed Anass Majbar, Amine Benkabbou, Saber Boutayeb, Benoit You, Olivier Glehen, Raouf Mohsine, Naoual Bakrin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Amine SouadkaSurgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Hajar EssangriSurgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Mohammed Anass MajbarSurgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Amine BenkabbouSurgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Saber BoutayebMedical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Benoit YouDépartement d'oncologie médicale Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Olivier GlehenDépartement de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Raouf MohsineSurgical Oncology Department, National Institute of Oncology, University Mohammed V in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.
Naoual BakrinDépartement de Chirurgie Digestive et Endocrinienne, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Mohammed V University · MAHospices Civils de Lyon · FRHôpital Lyon Sud · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The utility of heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has been assessed in several randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses, and it is still a subject of controversy. Therefore, we performed an umbrella review of existing meta-analyses to summarise the outcomes of HIPEC and cytoreductive surgery (CRS) association in ovarian cancer. Methods: We examined the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Prospero, Web of Science and Science Direct from inception to May 30, 2020, for meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Analyses of overall survival, disease free survival and progression survival were performed separately for primary and recurrent ovarian cancers. Results: We identified 6 meta-analyses investigating the association of HIPEC with CRS in the management of ovarian cancer. Three year overall survival was significantly improved by the association of CRS and HIPEC for primary (HR: 0.66, 95%CI:0.56-0.78) and recurrent ovarian cancers (HR:0.50, 95%CI:0.38-0.64). This benefit was also demonstrated on disease-free survival for primary (HR: 0.54, 95%CI:0.48-0.61) and recurrent ovarian cancer (HR: 0.60, 95%CI:0.46-0.78). The pooled hazard ratios confirmed the advantage of HIPEC and CRS association with respect to CRS alone on progression free survival for primary and recurrent ovarian cancer respectively with HR: 0.50, 95%CI: 0.43-0.58 and HR: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.41-0.85. Conclusion: While waiting for the results of the current prospective studies, the present umbrella study suggests that HIPEC performed at the end of CRS may be a complementary effective asset for ovarian cancer patient management.

Indexed as

cytoreductive surgery and HIPECepithelial ovarian cancerHIPECmeta-analysisperitoneal carcinomatosis (PC)umbrella review

Identifiers

PMID35615149
PMCPMC9124965
OpenAlexW4229376105

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.