ReviewPleura and peritoneum2024
Do all patients that undergo a 'complete' secondary cytoreductive surgery for platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer, benefit from it?
Review in Pleura and peritoneum, 2024. 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.
- Targeting VEGF, PARP, and FRα Pathways in Ovarian Cancer: Clinical Advances with Bevacizumab, Rucaparib, and Mirvetuximab Soravtansine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Patient Selection Metrics and Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Study on key markers of NETosis: predictive indicator for postoperative frailty following complete cytoreductive surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- HIPEC in recurrent ovarian cancer: flogging a tired HORSE?Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Following the results of three randomized trials (GOG-213, DESKTOP-III, and SOC-1), secondary cytoreductive surgery (sCRS) is recommended as a therapeutic option for all patients with platinum-sensitive recurrence by the NCCN guidelines and for oligometastatic recurrence by the ESMO-ESGO guidelines. Criteria for predicting a complete gross resection (CGR) were used to select patients for sCRS in all three trials. No trial used surgical prognostic factors like disease sites or disease extent for stratification. The outcomes of sCRS varied in preplanned/post-hoc subgroup analyses. The survival following an incomplete CRS was worse than with systemic chemotherapy alone. Not all patients will benefit similarly from sCRS, even if a CGR is obtained. No trial evaluated the benefit of sCRS in patients receiving poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. While GOG-213 showed no benefit of sCRS when bevacizumab was used, the role of bevacizumab in patients having a CGR was not evaluated. The use of targeted therapies during first-line therapy is increasing, affecting treatment decisions and future clinical trial designs. New trials on sCRS should stratify patients according to surgical prognostic factors; sub-group analyses should be performed only in patients with CGR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.