ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Quality of Life and Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Large Prospective Cohort Study.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Quality of Life Analysis in SRC + HIPEC Patients: Single-Center Experience.Journal of clinical 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the factors associated with its deterioration is vital for defining meaningful outcomes and developing shared decision-making approaches. This study examined the temporal evolution of quality of life (QoL), determined the MCID, and identified factors influencing MCID deterioration in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) compared with those undergoing CRS alone.
methodsQoL was assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-CR29 preoperatively, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. This prospective cohort study employed the anchor-based method, using the Global Rating of Change Scale to measure MCID for QoL.
resultsAfter adjusting for the inverse probability of treatment weighting method, both cohorts exhibited comparable overall covariates. The CRS plus HIPEC group demonstrated a significant net positive effect on QoL measures compared with the CRS-alone group over time (p < 0.05). Patients with CRS plus HIPEC had a larger MCID than those with CRS alone for both improvement and deterioration. MCID deterioration was significantly associated with surgical approach, age, sex, body mass index, cancer stage, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, recurrence status, and preoperative QoL (p < 0.05).
conclusionsCRS plus HIPEC and CRS alone effectively alleviated symptoms and extended survival in our patients with colorectal cancer despite initial deterioration in QoL and morbidities. QoL and symptoms typically improved or returned to baseline within 3 months, especially with CRS plus HIPEC. These findings provide crucial evidence for preoperative shared decision making, perioperative care references, and postoperative management strategy planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40877723What 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.