ArticlePleura and peritoneum2025
Clinical utility of the peritoneal pathologic regression in gastric cancer patients associated to peritoneal metastasis. a study protocol.
Article in Pleura and peritoneum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Peritoneal regression grade score (PRGS) has emerged a scoring system designed to measure the extent of residual disease following systemic or intraperitoneal therapies in patients with carcinomatosis. Higher (3-4) PRG-Scores match with a mediocre treatment response and prognosis. Conversely, lower grades (1-2) response are linked to significantly longer overall and progression-free survival periods. This study explores the utility of PRGS in assessing prognosis and optimizing therapeutic strategies for patients with peritoneal metastasis secondary to gastric malignancy. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study, including patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastasis undergoing chemotherapy with intent for subsequent cytoreductive surgery. The primary endpoint of the study is to assess the pathological response of peritoneal involvement to primary chemotherapy according to the PRGS. Secondary objectives are to correlate PRGS with some clinical, pathological and molecular features (MMR, PDL1, CPS, HER2) as well as with other clinical and biochemical markers related to chemotherapy response. Results: This protocol summarizes the current scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of the PRGS in assessing peritoneal response to targeted therapies. It further hypothesizes its potential utility in evaluating the effects of systemic therapies for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases, while also defining inclusion and exclusion criteria and outlining a flowchart for its implementation. Conclusions: Our final endpoint is to expand PRGS applications to curative settings and identify factors such as tumor biology and chemotherapy regimens that may guide patient selection for adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis.
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.