Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36159216›Full record

ArticlePleura and peritoneum2022

Importance of biopsy site selection for peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) in peritoneal metastasis treated with repeated pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).

Mojib Fallah, Sönke Detlefsen, Alan P Ainsworth, Claus W Fristrup, Michael B Mortensen, Per Pfeiffer, Line S Tarpgaard, Martin Graversen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pleura and peritoneum, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Mojib FallahOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0705-9465
Sönke DetlefsenOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Alan P AinsworthOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Claus W FristrupOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Michael B MortensenOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7270-5005
Per PfeifferOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Line S TarpgaardOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Martin GraversenOdense PIPAC Center, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The four-tiered peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) is used for histological response evaluation in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) treated with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Four quadrant biopsies (QBs) from the parietal peritoneum should be assessed by PRGS, but consensus on biopsy site strategy for follow-up biopsies during repeated PIPACs is lacking. We aimed to evaluate whether there is a difference between PRGS in QBs from clips marked PM (QB-CM) compared to biopsies from PM with the visually most malignant features (worst biopsy, WB). Methods: Prospective, descriptive study. During the first PIPAC, index QBs sites were marked with metal clips. During the second PIPAC, an independent surgical oncologist selected biopsy site for WB and biopsies were taken from QB-CM and WB. One blinded pathologist evaluated all biopsies according to PRGS. From each biopsy, three step sections were stained H&E, followed by an immunostained section, and another three step sections stained H&E. Results: Thirty-four patients were included from March 2020 to May 2021. Median age 64 years. Maximum mean PRGS in QB-CM at PIPAC 1 was 3.3 (SD 1.2). Maximum mean PRGS in QB-CM at PIPAC 2 was 2.6 (SD 1.2), whereas mean PRGS in WB at PIPAC 2 was 2.4 (SD 1.3). At PIPAC 2, there was agreement between maximum PRGS from QB-CM and PRGS from WB in 21 patients. Maximum PRGS from QB-CM was higher in nine and lower in four patients, compared to PRGS from WB. Conclusions: Biopsies from QB-CM did not overestimate treatment response compared to biopsies from WB.

Indexed as

biopsyclips markedperitoneal metastasisPeritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS)Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)

Identifiers

PMID36159216
PMCPMC9467898

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.