ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for management of gastrointestinal and biliary tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) promised to transform the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Forty years since the introduction of the technique, published data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain scarce. We assessed the cumulative comprehensive available evidence on the use of HIPEC in gastrointestinal (GI) and biliary tract malignancies and established the current benchmark for GI HIPEC research in both the prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases. Methods: RCTs were identified through a systematic search of Medline, Cochrane and Embase databases. Overall survival and progression-free survival were the outcomes of interest. Results: The search resulted in 13 RCTs for gastric cancer (10 on prophylactic and 3 on therapeutic HIPEC), 4 for colorectal cancer (2 on prophylactic and 2 on therapeutic HIPEC), and 1 for pancreatic cancer. No RCTs were identified that included other types of GI or biliary tract cancers. Current randomized evidence does not support any overall survival benefit from the use of HIPEC in the adjuvant setting for gastric cancer or for colorectal cancer in any setting. Despite the survival benefit noticed in the treatment of PC from gastric cancer (risk ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.93; P<0.001), the results were derived from only 190 patients. Conclusions: The current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of HIPEC in the treatment/prevention of PC in GI and biliary tract malignancies. HIPEC should continue to be considered experimental until level 1 evidence from properly designed international multicenter studies becomes available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.