Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36765746›Full record

ArticleCancers2023

The Impact of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) versus Conventional Surgery on Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Comparative Cohort Study between the CAIRO6 Trial and the PROCORE Study.

Checca Bakkers, Vincent C J van de Vlasakker, Koen P B Rovers, Robin J Lurvink, Simon W Nienhuijs, Jacobus W A Burger, Geert-Jan M Creemers, Cynthia S Bonhof, Floortje Mols, Ignace H J T de Hingh

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2023. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

10 authors.

Checca BakkersDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Vincent C J van de VlasakkerDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2549-4054
Koen P B RoversDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Robin J LurvinkDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2692-0994
Simon W NienhuijsDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0104-9477
Jacobus W A BurgerDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Geert-Jan M CreemersDepartment of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Cynthia S BonhofCenter of Research on Psychological and Somatic Disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Floortje MolsCenter of Research on Psychological and Somatic Disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0818-2913
Ignace H J T de HinghDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, P.O. Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose-To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases to PROs of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing conventional surgery. Methods-Data were extracted from the CAIRO6 trial (CRS-HIPEC group) and the PROCORE study (conventional surgery group). Nine predefined PROs (derived from the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire) were compared at baseline, in the early postoperative period and one year postoperatively, with correction for treatment with systemic therapy using linear mixed modeling. Results-In total, 331 patients were included: 71 in the CRS-HIPEC group and 260 in the conventional surgery group. All predefined PROs (fatigue, diarrhea, C30 summary score, Global Health Status, physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning) did not differ significantly between the groups at all three timepoints, and differential effects over time for all PROs did not differ significantly between the groups. Significant worsening of fatigue, C30 summary score, physical and role functioning (both groups), and cognitive and social functioning (conventional surgery group only) was present in the early postoperative period. All scores returned to baseline at one year postoperatively, except for physical and cognitive functioning in the conventional surgery group. Emotional functioning improved postoperatively in both groups compared to baseline. Conclusion-Despite a more extensive procedure with greater risk of morbidity, CRS-HIPEC in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases did not have a greater negative impact on PROs than conventional surgery in patients with CRC. Further, systemic therapy did not affect these PROs. These findings may facilitate future patient counseling and shared decision making in clinical practice.

Indexed as

colorectal neoplasmsCRS-HIPECcytoreductionpatient-reported outcome measuresperitoneal neoplasmsquality of lifesurgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID36765746
PMCPMC9913313

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.