Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39904852›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2025

Cytoreductive Surgery Plus HIPEC in Recurrent or Newly Diagnosed Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: a Meta-analysis.

C Taliento, S Restaino, M Arcieri, G Scutiero, P Greco, G Scambia, G Vizzielli

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 7 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. 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

7 authors.

C TalientoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
S RestainoClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy.
M ArcieriClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy.
G ScutieroDepartment of Medical Sciences, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
P GrecoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
G ScambiaDipartimento per la salute della Donna e del Bambino e della Salute Pubblica, UOC Ginecologia Oncologica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
G VizzielliClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Santa Maria della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy. giuseppevizzielli@yahoo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2424-2691

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2024, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published, providing new high-quality evidence on HIPEC in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Updating data on progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events could offer a clearer understanding of the benefits and risks of HIPEC combined with cytoreductive surgery (CRS), with or without prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). PATIENTS AND

methodsAn electronic search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, and CENTRAL up to 23 November 2024. We only included RCTs reporting PFS and adverse events of interval or secondary CRS, with or without HIPEC, in newly diagnosed or recurrent EOC.

resultsThe meta-analysis included six RCTs. The addition of HIPEC to surgery significantly improved PFS in patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage EOC who received NACT (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.39-0.88; p = 0.01). No significant difference in PFS was observed between secondary CRS plus HIPEC and CRS alone in recurrent ovarian cancer without prior NACT (HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.82-1.83; p = 0.32). Regarding adverse events, a decrease in platelet count of any grade was more frequent in the HIPEC group (p = 0.03). The overall risk of acute kidney failure (AKF) was 10.6%, with a significantly higher incidence compared with CRS alone (p = 0.003).

conclusionsThe addition of HIPEC to CRS significantly improved PFS compared with surgery alone in patients with advanced EOC who received NACT. However, the treatment was associated with a higher incidence of AKF, which occurred in 10.6% of patients who underwent HIPEC.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresHyperthermia, InducedHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOvarian NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival RateAdverse eventsCytoreductive surgeryHIPECOvarian cancerPFSProgression-free survival

Identifiers

PMID39904852
PMCPMC11976761

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.