ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Tertiary cytoreduction for recurrence of ovarian CANCER patients after intraperitoneal chemotherapy.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluated the feasibility, complications, and outcomes of a tertiary cytoreduction after second-line treatment with IP (intraperitoneal) versus IV (intravenous) chemotherapy in recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) patients. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of patients treated with an optimal tertiary cytoreduction. At the second relapse, the patients underwent optimal secondary surgery followed by IP chemotherapy (case group) or by IV chemotherapy (control group). Differences in treatment-related morbidity rate, pattern of recurrence, and oncologic outcomes were evaluated by Mann-Whitney and Chi-Squared. Kaplan-Meier and frailty model for recurrent events were used to assess statistical significance in differences of disease-free survival. Results: Charts of 60 patients with a second ROC were identified. The patients with extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis or an inaccessible abdominal cavity were excluded. Twenty-nine patients (48.3%) who underwent optimal tertiary cytoreduction were included: 16 and 13 patients were from the IP and IV groups, respectively. At the second relapse, 56.2% of patients in the IP group and 61.5% in the IV group presented oligometastatic disease, respectively. The adhesions were significantly more represented in the IP group than the IV group ( Conclusion: The present study showed that IP chemotherapy does not represent an obstacle to surgery in ROC patients. The surgery after IP is feasible. No significant differences in terms of complications and outcomes were observed in the two groups.
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.