Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35892837›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Does MIS Play a Role in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer?

Augusto Pereira, Javier F Magrina, Paul M Magtibay, Joao Siufi Neto, Daniela F S Siufi, Yu-Hui H Chang, Tirso Perez-Medina

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Augusto PereiraDepartment of Gynecologic Surgery, Puerta de Hierro University Hospital, 28222 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2534-1007
Javier F MagrinaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Gynecology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Paul M MagtibayDepartment of Medical and Surgical Gynecology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA.
Joao Siufi NetoGynecologic Division, BP-A Beneficencia Portuguesa de Sao Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo 01323-001, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-5057-5836
Daniela F S SiufiGynecologic Division, BP-A Beneficencia Portuguesa de Sao Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo 01323-001, Brazil.
Yu-Hui H ChangDepartment of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA.
Tirso Perez-MedinaDepartment of Gynecologic Surgery, Puerta de Hierro University Hospital, 28222 Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4560-453X
Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda · ESMayo Clinic Hospital · USUniversidade de São Paulo · BRMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy allows a minimally invasive approach for interval debulking in patients with ovarian cancer considered unresectable to no residual disease by laparotomy at diagnosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the type of surgical approach at interval debulking (ID) after three courses of carboplatin and taxol in patients with unresectable ovarian cancer at diagnosis compared with the type of surgical approach at primary debulking (PD). A secondary objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. laparotomy at ID. A retrospective review of the type of surgical approach at ID following three courses of carboplatin and taxol was compared with the surgical approach at PD, and a review of the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. open at ID was performed during the period from 21 January 2012, through 21 February 2013, for stage IIIC > 2 cm or IV epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) unresectable at diagnosis and the surgical approach at PD. During the study period, 127 patients with stage IIIC or IV EOC met the inclusion criteria. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), laparoscopic or robotic, was used in 21.6% of patients at ID and in 23.3% of patients at PD. At ID, MIS patients had a shorter hospital stay as compared to laparotomy (2 vs. 8 days; p < 0.001). At 5 year follow-up, 31.5% of EOC patients were alive (ID MIS: 47.5% vs. ID open: 30%; PD MIS: 41% vs. PD open: 28%), while 24.4% had no evidence of disease (ID MIS: 39% vs. ID open: 19.5%; PD MIS: 32% vs. PD open: 22%). Among living patients, 22% had evidence of disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a form of chemo-debulking and allows a minimally invasive approach at interval debulking in about one-fifth of the patients, with initial disease deemed unresectable to no residual tumor at initial diagnosis.

Indexed as

interval cytoreductionneoadjuvant chemotherapyovarian malignancyprimary cytoreductionprogression-free survivalsurvival

Identifiers

PMID35892837
PMCPMC9331315
OpenAlexW4286697949

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.