Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42547752›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026

Secondary Cytoreductive Surgery ± Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Recurrent Colorectal Cancer Peritoneal Metastases.

Kailey M Oppat, Frances J Bennett, Sameer H Patel, Mustafa Raoof, Joel M Baumgartner, Harveshp D Mogal, Laura A Lambert, Daniel E Abbott, Jonathan B Greer, Travis E Grotz and 10 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Kailey M OppatDepartment of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Frances J BennettDepartment of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sameer H PatelDepartment of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Mustafa RaoofDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Joel M BaumgartnerDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Harveshp D MogalDepartment of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Fred Hutch Cancer Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Laura A LambertDepartment of Surgery, Section of Surgical Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Daniel E AbbottDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Jonathan B GreerDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Travis E GrotzDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Keith F FournierDepartment of Surgical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Sean P DineenDepartment of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Department of Oncologic Sciences, Moffitt Cancer Center, Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA.
Benjamin PowersDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mohammad Y ZaidiDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Joshua H WinerDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Maria C RussellDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Charles A StaleyDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jordan M CloydDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Shishir K MaithelDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Seth J ConcorsDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. seth.jason.concors@emory.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3918-3954

Funding

Implementing a Maternal health and PRegnancy Outcomes Vision for Everyone (IMPROVE)UL1TR002378 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Andres J Garcia, Elizabeth O. Ofili · 2017 to 2026
$92.1M
J: NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002382 · NCATS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI HENRY M BLUMBERG, Vasiliki Michopoulos · 2017 to 2026
$8.5M
T32 Training Program in Cancer BiologyT32CA275777 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI David Sung-wen Yu · 2023 to 2026
$1.1M
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health UL1TR002378/TL1TR002382NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002382NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002378NCI NIH HHS T32 CA275777NCI NIH HHS T32 CA275777Project-01A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost patients who have colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) treated with cytoreductive surgery ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS±HIPEC) experience recurrence within 1 year. This study assessed the safety and oncologic value of secondary CRS±HIPEC for patients with CRC-PM.

methodsA multi-institutional database of patients treated for CRC-PM (2000-2024) was reviewed. Patients who underwent curative-intent initial CRS±HIPEC alone were compared with those who underwent secondary CRS±HIPEC for recurrent disease. Patients who received more than two procedures were excluded. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of secondary CRS±HIPEC for CRC-PM as measured by perioperative outcomes. The secondary objective was to examine the association between overall survival (OS) and secondary CRS±HIPEC.

resultsThe study included 136 patients, 17 of whom underwent secondary CRS±HIPEC. There was no difference in postoperative complications between secondary and initial CRS±HIPEC. When OS was defined from the date of the index operation, secondary CRS±HIPEC was associated with improved OS versus initial CRS±HIPEC alone (51.0 months [95% confidence interval {CI}, 39.8-62.2 months] vs. 24.0 months [95 % CI, 19.4-28.6) months]). To assess the value of secondary CRS±HIPEC, OS was compared from the date of the second procedure for the secondary cohort. Overall survival measured after secondary CRS±HIPEC was similar to that after initial CRS±HIPEC (27.0 months [95 % CI, 17.3-36.7 months] vs. 24.0 months [95 % CI, 19.4-28.6 months]). Among the patients with recurrence after their index CRS±HIPEC, secondary CRS±HIPEC remained associated with better OS than that of those who received only one procedure (27.0 months [95 % CI, 17.3-36.7 months] vs. 12.0 months [95 % CI, 9.2-14.8 months]).

conclusionSecondary CRS±HIPEC should be considered for well-selected patients with CRC-PM recurrence.

Indexed as

Colorectal cancer peritoneal metastasesCytoreductive surgery ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapySecondary surgery

Identifiers

PMID42547752
PMCPMC13505413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.