Experimental studies in cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: overview and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cytoreductive surgery combined to hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is the standard of care for selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies.Preclinical studies, especially when performed on animal models, provide a framework for improvement of this treatment.This study aims to present an overview of a single institution's experience in this setting.Methods/Results: Review of all preclinical studies from a single center was conducted using PubMed and author databases.Multiple experiments were conducted using pig and rat models.These studies examined the impact of different surgical techniques, such as the electrovaporization of tumor nodules and the use of different suture material, in the context of HIPEC.The pharmacokinetics of multiple intraperitoneal cytotoxic agents -namely oxaliplatin, raltitrexed, irinotecan and pemetrexed -were also studied. Conclusion:Experimental studies help guide future directions for the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".