Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39382749›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025

Insight into Predictors of Cytoreduction Score Following Cytoreductive Surgery-Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Improves Patient Selection and Prognostic Outcomes.

Ahmed B Hamed, Rudy El Asmar, Nikhil Tirukkovalur, Adam Tcharni, Curtis Tatsuoka, Mark Jelinek, Joshua Derby, Genia Dubrovsky, Geoffrey Nunns, Melanie Ongchin and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

16 authors.

Ahmed B Hamed *Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Rudy El Asmar *Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Nikhil TirukkovalurDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Adam TcharniFaculty of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Curtis TatsuokaDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Mark JelinekUPMC Hillman Cancer Center Biostatistics Facility, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Joshua DerbyDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Genia DubrovskyDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Geoffrey NunnsDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Melanie OngchinDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
James F PingpankDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Amer H ZureikatDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
David L BartlettDepartment of Surgery, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Aatur SinghiDepartment of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
M Haroon ChoudryDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Samer S AlMasriDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA. almasris@upmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9403-7503

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeritoneal metastases due to gastric adenocarcinoma (GCPM) carry a dismal prognosis. A promising treatment strategy is cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC), but clear eligibility criteria for GCPM are lacking. We sought to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS) following CRS-HIPEC for GCPM to help optimize patient selection and clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND

methodsIn this single-center retrospective cohort study, we examined CRS-HIPEC outcomes for patients with GCPM between 2001 and 2021. After analyzing patient demographic, clinicopathologic, and perioperative variables, we applied multivariable Cox hazard models to assess factors associated with OS. We then assessed associations between baseline predictors and prognostically important variables using multivariable logistic regression.

resultsWe analyzed 55 patients with GCPM who underwent CRS-HIPEC. Median age was 54 years and 42% were female. Median peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) was 8, and 75% of patients achieved a cytoreduction completeness score (CC score) of 0. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 months, and median OS was 14.1 months. On adjusted analysis, a CC score > 0 (HR 2.3, p = 0.02) was significantly associated with worse OS. A peritoneal carcinomatosis index greater than 13 (OR 52.6, p = 0.001) and fewer lymph nodes (especially < 18) resected with the primary tumor (OR 0.86, p = 0.042) in the metachronous setting were significantly associated with incomplete macroscopic cytoreduction (CC score > 0).

conclusionsWe demonstrated that PCI > 13 and primary lymph nodes harvested < 18 in metachronous tumors are associated with CC score > 0, which in turn portends a worse OS. Although these results warrant prospective validation, they provide insight into improved selection of patients with GCPM for CRS-HIPEC.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyPatient SelectionPeritoneal NeoplasmsStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy, Cancer, Regional PerfusionCombined Modality TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedCytoreductive surgeryGastric peritoneal metastasisIntraperitoneal chemotherapy

Identifiers

PMID39382749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.