showed a trendp = 0.055
However, in the analysis of DFS ( Figures 3C, D ), the original cohort showed a trend toward improved DFS in the HIPEC group, approaching statistical significance (HR 0.700; 95% CI 0.486–1.010; p = 0.055).
However, in the analysis of DFS ( Figures 3C, D ), the original cohort showed a trend toward improved DFS in the HIPEC group, approaching statistical significance (HR 0.700; 95% CI 0.486–1.010; p = 0.055).
In our study, the Kaplan-Meier curve before PSM showed higher DFS in the HIPEC group, but the difference was marginally significant ( P = 0.055), likely due to baseline imbalances between the two groups.
Regarding recurrence patterns, the original cohort showed that the non-HIPEC group (15.1%) had a greater risk of isolated PM than the HIPEC group (6.9%), but the difference did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.088).