ArticleSurgical oncology insight2026
Optimal duration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to CRS ± HIPEC for colorectal cancer: An assessment of survival and postoperative outcomes.
Article in Surgical oncology insight, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) represents a viable therapy for select patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) peritoneal metastases. Given recurrence rates, challenges returning to oncologic treatment postoperatively, and desire to assess tumor biology, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is common. Evidence-based guidance regarding NAC duration is limited. Methods: A single institution database (2009-2024) of patients with CRC that underwent CRS ± HIPEC was reviewed. Patients undergoing curative intent CRS ± HIPEC with known NAC duration were stratified by NAC duration (0-3 vs > 3 months). Primary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcome was clinically significant postoperative complications. Results: From 2009-2024, 87 patients underwent curative intent CRS ± HIPEC (> 3 months NAC: 58 patients, 0-3 months NAC: 29 patients). Median peritoneal cancer index score was similar between cohorts (> 3 months: 11 vs 0-3 months: 12; p = 0.98). RFS and OS were not statistically different based on NAC duration (RFS: > 3 months: 8 months vs 0-3 months: 15 months, p = 0.28) (OS: > 3 months: 26 months vs 0-3 months: 35 months; p = 0.33). > 3 months of NAC was associated with increased median length of stay (> 3 months: 10 days vs 0-3 months: 8 days; p = 0.04). Even when controlling for other perioperative variables on multivariable analysis, > 3 months of NAC was associated with increased risk of clinically significant complications (HR 3.47, 95 % CI 1.11-10.88; p = 0.03). Conclusion: Greater duration of NAC prior to CRS ± HIPEC is not associated with improved RFS or OS, and, rather, is associated with higher complication rate and longer hospital stay.
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.