Observational studyMedicine2019
What is the appropriate duration of adjuvant imatinib mesylate treatment for primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors classified according to the strict definition of tumor rupture?
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival of patients with ruptured gastrointestinal stromal tumour treated with adjuvant imatinib in a randomised trial.British journal of cancer · 2024Trial
- Management of subepithelial esophageal tumors.Innovative surgical sciences · 2025Review
- Re-appraisal of the universal definition of tumor rupture among patients with high-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Rectovaginal extragastrointestinal stromal tumour (EGIST): an additional entity to be considered in the differential diagnosis of tumours of the rectovaginal septum.BMJ case reports · 2021Review
- Gastrointestinal stromal tumor presenting as a rectovaginal septal mass: A case report and review of literature.Medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), rupture is a high-risk feature; however, "tumor rupture" is inconsistently defined, and its prognostic value remains controversial.Six hundred ninety-one patients undergoing surgery for primary nonmetastatic GISTs from 2003 to 2015 at our institution were enrolled. The strict definitions of "tumor rupture" according to the Kinki GIST Study Group (KGSG) were used.The median follow-up time was 64 months. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates in the entire group were 79.3% and 84.1%, respectively. According to the KGSG's definition, tumor rupture occurred only in 24 (3.5%) of 691 patients. For all 691 patients, multivariable analysis showed that tumor rupture, according to KGSG's definition, is one of the independently prognostic factors for both RFS and OS. Twenty-four patients with tumor rupture were further analyzed. Receiving IM for more than 3 years was significantly associated with improved RFS and OS in GISTs patients with tumor rupture.Tumor rupture according to KGSG's definition was an independent predictive factor associated with GIST patient prognosis. More importantly, for GISTs with tumor rupture according to the KGSG's strict definition, receiving IM treatment for ≥3 years should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.