SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Comparative efficacy and safety of different treatment strategies for primary advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
Background: For patients with primary advanced ovarian cancer (OC), multiple treatment strategies based on cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy are available, but the optimal strategy remains undetermined. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary debulking surgery (PDS), interval cytoreductive surgery (IDS) and IDS combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in treating primary advanced OC. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases, covering publications up to June 23, 2025. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to assess the probability that each treatment strategy would be the better choice for each outcome. Results: Seven RCTs involving 2,058 patients were included in this NMA. Based on the SUCRA values, the IDS plus intraoperative HIPEC strategy achieved the highest ranking for overall survival (OS; SUCRA = 0.99) and disease-free survival (DFS; SUCRA = 0.99). Meanwhile, the addition of intraoperative HIPEC did not increase major postoperative complications (SUCRA = 0.68) or prolong the duration of hospital stay (SUCRA = 0.47). IDS could enhance the complete resection rate (SUCRA = 0.81) and reduce major postoperative complications (SUCRA = 0.75). Conclusions: Until new evidence becomes available, IDS plus intraoperative HIPEC are associated with better OS and DFS for patients with primary advanced OC. Besides, IDS had advantages in increasing the complete resection rate and reducing major postoperative complications.
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.