Evaluation of repeat cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with recurrent peritoneal carcinomatosis from appendiceal and colorectal cancers: a multicentre Canadian study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Peritoneal recurrences after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for appendiceal and colorectal cancers are frequent. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and perioperative and long-term outcomes of repeat CRS/HIPEC in patients with recurrent peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal and appendiceal origin. Methods: Data were collected from patients treated from 2000 to 2016 for recurrent peritoneal carcinomatosis from appendiceal or colorectal cancer with CRS/HIPEC at 2 specialist centres. Data on demographics, procedure details, morbidity and survival were recorded. Analyses compared the iterations of CRS/HIPEC to assess the safety and effectiveness of repeat surgery. Results: Of all patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC in the 2 centres, 37 patients underwent a repeat procedure. Operative time was similar for the first and second surgeries (412.1 v. 412.5 min, p = 0.74) but patients had a significantly lower peritoneal carcinoma index score with the second surgery (21.8 in the first iteration v. 9.53 in the second iteration, p < 0.001) and significantly less blood loss (1762 mL in the first iteration v. 790 mL in the second iteration, p = 0.001). There was a nonsignificant decrease in grade III–IV complications and there was no 30-day mortality associated with repeat procedures. For patients with colorectal cancer, median disease-free survival was 9.6 months and median overall survival was 40 months. For patients with appendiceal cancer, median disease-free survival was 15 months and overall survival was 64.4 months. Conclusion: Repeat CRS/HIPEC procedures for recurrent appendiceal and colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis are safe in well-selected patients, without increased morbidity or mortality, and they are associated with significant long-term survival, particularly for patients with appendiceal cancers. These results support the use of repeat CRS/HIPEC in these patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".