The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Randomized Trial of Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Versus Systemic Chemotherapy and Palliative Surgery in Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Cancer
Abstract
Purpose: To confirm the findings from uncontrolled studies that aggressive cytoreduction in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is superior to standard treatment in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer origin. Patients and Methods: Between February 1998 and August 2001, 105 patients were randomly assigned to receive either standard treatment consisting of systemic chemotherapy (fluorouracil-leucovorin) with or without palliative surgery, or experimental therapy consisting of aggressive cytoreduction with HIPEC, followed by the same systemic chemotherapy regime. The primary end point was survival. Results: After a median follow-up period of 21.6 months, the median survival was 12.6 months in the standard therapy arm and 22.3 months in the experimental therapy arm (log-rank test, P = .032). The treatment-related mortality in the aggressive therapy group was 8%. Most complications from HIPEC were related to bowel leakage. Subgroup analysis of the HIPEC group showed that patients with 0 to 5 of the 7 regions of the abdominal cavity involved by tumor at the time of the cytoreduction had a significantly better survival than patients with 6 or 7 affected regions (log-rank test, P < .0001). If the cytoreduction was macroscopically complete (R-1), the median survival was also significantly better than in patients with limited (R-2a), or extensive residual disease (R-2b; log-rank test, P < .0001). Conclusion: Cytoreduction followed by HIPEC improves survival in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin. However, patients with involvement of six or more regions of the abdominal cavity, or grossly incomplete cytoreduction, had still a grave prognosis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: ASCO Guideline
Morris, V. K., Kennedy, E. B., Baxter, N. N., Benson, A. B., Cercek, A., Cho, M., Ciombor, K. K., Cremolini, C., Davis, A., Deming, D. A., et al. (2023) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.22.01690 · Cited by 682
Franko, J., Shi, Q., Goldman, C. D., Pockaj, B. A., Nelson, G. D., Goldberg, R. M., Pitot, H. C., Grothey, A., Alberts, S. R., & Sargent, D. J. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.37.1039 · Cited by 587
Coccolini, F. (2013) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.6979 · Cited by 325
Diagnosis and Treatment of Ovarian Cancer
Orr, B., & Edwards, R. P. (2018) · Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.hoc.2018.07.010 · Cited by 322
Klaver, C. E. L., Wisselink, D. D., Punt, C. J. A., Snaebjornsson, P., Crezee, J., Aalbers, A. G. J., Brandt, A., Bremers, A. J. A., Burger, J. W. A., Fabry, H. F. J., et al. (2019) · The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30239-0 · Cited by 322
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Verwaal, V. J., van Ruth, S., de Bree, E., van Slooten, G. W., van Tinteren, H., Boot, H., & Zoetmulder, F. A. N.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2003-10-15
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 3737-3743
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2004554342
- Cited by
- 2,049
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 40.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized Trial of Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Versus Systemic Chemotherapy and Palliative Surgery in Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2003.04.187
- The paper
- Verwaal, V. J., van Ruth, S., de Bree, E., van Slooten, G. W., van Tinteren, H., Boot, H., & Zoetmulder, F. A. N. (2003). Randomized Trial of Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Versus Systemic Chemotherapy and Palliative Surgery in Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2003.04.187
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.