Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36977622›Full record

ArticleGynecologic oncology2023

Minimally invasive interval debulking surgery for advanced ovarian cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Kirsten Jorgensen, Alexander Melamed, Chi-Fang Wu, Roni Nitecki, Rene Pareja, Anna Fagotti, John O Schorge, Pedro T Ramirez, Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2025 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kirsten JorgensenDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. Electronic address: kajorgensen@mdanderson.org.
Alexander MelamedDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States.
Chi-Fang WuDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Roni NiteckiDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Rene ParejaGynecologic Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Bogota, Colombia.
Anna FagottiDepartment of Woman's and Child Health and Public Health Sciences, Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
John O SchorgeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, United States.
Pedro T RamirezDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Jose Alejandro Rauh-HainDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USInstituto Nacional de Cancerología · COMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Training of Academic Gynecologic OncologistsT32CA101642 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI ANIL K SOOD, Kathleen Schmeler · 2005 to 2026
$9.2M
Obstetrical and Oncological Outcomes Among Reproductive Age Women with Gynecological and Breast CancerK08CA234333 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI RAUH-HAIN, JOSE ALEJANDRO · 2018 to 2022
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA234333NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS T32 CA101642
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAssess outcomes of interval debulking surgery (IDS) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy via minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with laparotomy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

methodsPatients diagnosed with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian cancer between 2013 and 2018 who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and IDS were identified in the National Cancer Database. Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were 5-year survival, 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality, extent of surgery, residual disease, hospitalization duration, surgical conversions, and unplanned readmissions. Propensity score matching was used to compare MIS and laparotomy for IDS. Association of treatment approach with overall survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. Sensitivity analysis was conducted for effect of unmeasured confounders.

resultsA total of 7897 patients met inclusion criteria; 2021 (25.6%) underwent MIS. Percentage undergoing MIS increased from 20.3%-29.0% over the study period. After propensity score matching, median overall survival was 46.7 months in the MIS group versus 41.0 months in the laparotomy group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.86 (95%CI 0.79-0.94)]. Five-year survival probability was higher in MIS versus laparotomy (38.3% vs 34.8%, p < 0.01). There was lower 30- and 90-day mortality (0.3% vs 0.7% [p = 0.04] and 1.4% vs 2.5% [p = 0.01], respectively), shorter length of stay (median 3 vs 5 days, p < 0.01), lower residual disease (23.9% vs 26.7%, p < 0.01), and lower additional cytoreductive procedures (59.3% vs 70.8%, p < 0.01) in MIS compared to laparotomy, with similar rates of unplanned readmission (2.7% vs 3.1%, p = 0.39).

conclusionsPatients who undergo IDS by MIS have similar overall survival and decreased morbidity compared with laparotomy.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyOvarian NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialChemotherapy, AdjuvantCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesInterval debulkingLaparoscopic surgeryMinimally invasive surgeryOvarian cancer

Identifiers

PMID36977622
PMCPMC10192032
OpenAlexW4360977243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.