ReviewAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Consensus Guideline for the Management of Peritoneal Mesothelioma.
Review in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Derived Organoid Models and Precision HIPEC in Diffuse Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma: Modeling Heterogeneity to Address Recurrence.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Hormonal Status May Contribute to Sex-Based Survival Differences in Epithelioid Peritoneal Mesothelioma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Underutilization of CRS, HIPEC & PIPAC in peritoneal mesothelioma across a German nationwide cohort.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Primary diffuse malignant epithelioid peritoneal mesothelioma of the greater omentum in an asbestos-naive patient: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of peritoneal mesothelioma (PeM) poses significant challenges owing to its rare incidence, heterogeneity, and limited clinical evidence. This manuscript describes results from a national consensus aimed at addressing management of PeM.
methodsAn update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus Guidelines was conducted using a Modified Delphi technique, encompassing two rounds of voting. The levels of agreement for various pathway blocks were assessed.
resultsOf 101 participants responding in the first round of Modified Delphi voting, 95 (94%) responded in the second round. Over 90% consensus was achieved in 5/6 and 6/6 pathway blocks in rounds I and II, respectively. Observation was recommended for benign neoplasms, with guidance for interventions in the presence of symptoms or concerning clinicopathologic features. For malignant pathology, management was outlined based on a multidisciplinary assessment of patient characteristics, disease histology, and predictive success of medical and surgical interventions. Additional emphasis was placed on multimodal therapy for Intermediate-Risk and appropriate High-Risk patients. A rapid review demonstrated limited availability of data and inconclusive findings regarding optimal systemic therapy timing. There was unanimous support for considering clinical trial enrollment.
conclusionsGiven limited evidence, the consensus-driven pathway provides essential guidance regarding the management of PeM. To further direct clinical care, additional dedicated research to generate higher-quality evidence is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40560500What 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.