ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2025
Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: Why Patient-Reported Outcomes Matter in Clinical Trials.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 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.
- Delayed phase dual-energy CT for early peritoneal metastasis prediction: imaging phenotypes and tumor-stroma correlates in upfront gastrectomy candidates.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastric cancer with peritoneal involvement is becoming increasingly common, particularly among younger patients with diffuse-type disease. This aggressive subtype carries a high symptom burden and severely impacts quality of life (QoL). Novel therapeutic strategies targeting peritoneal metastases, including normothermic intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC), and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC, are reshaping the treatment landscape. Among these, only NIPS has demonstrated a clear overall survival benefit, as shown in the phase III DRAGON-01 trial. PIPAC and CRS with HIPEC hold promise and are currently being investigated in randomised studies. However, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remain inconsistently captured. For example, neither DRAGON-01 nor PHOENIX-GC reported QoL data despite their clinical impact. By contrast, PERISCOPE II and PIPAC VER-ONE have incorporated PRO measures, including EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQSTO22, which are expected to provide more patient-centred insights. These instruments, while valuable, may not fully capture peritoneal-specific symptoms, highlighting the need for tailored tools. Routine integration and standardised reporting of PROs are critical to ensure that survival gains are accompanied by meaningful improvements in patient experience. As therapeutic strategies evolve, embedding PROs in trial design is essential for delivering value-based, patient-centred care in gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. [KD1]LE: Structured abstract is required in this type of journal. Please consider providing the aforesaid.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41203914What 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.