Trial reportJAMA surgery2020
Quality of Surgery and Outcome in Localized Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Treated Within an International Intergroup Randomized Clinical Trial of Adjuvant Imatinib.
Trial report in JAMA surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00103168 (Intermediate and High Risk Localized, Completely Resected, Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Intermediate and High Risk Localized, Completely Resected, Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) Expressing KIT Receptor: A Controlled Randomized Trial on Adjuvant Imatinib Mesylate (Glivec) Versus No Further Therapy After Complete Surgery
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Needle tract seeding and abdominal recurrence following pre-treatment biopsy of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST): results of a systematic review.BMC surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of Prognosis Between Microscopically Positive and Negative Surgical Margins for Primary Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison Among Endoscopic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resection for Relatively Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (<5 cm): A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Beyond Laparotomy: Multimodal Strategies and Emerging Evidence in Minimally Invasive Management of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.BioMed research international · 2026Review
- Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Small Intestinal Stromal Tumors: A Clinicopathological and Survival Analysis.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Resection of an Esophageal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor After Neoadjuvant Treatment: A New Paradigm for Minimally Invasive Therapy?ACG case reports journal · 2025Article
- Endoscopic resection of oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours: Promise, pitfalls and the path forward.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Overall survival and margin status in resected gastric stromal tumors.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Predictive models of lymph node metastasis in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors based on machine learning algorithms: a SEER-based retrospective study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Comparison of endoscopic and laparoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A propensity score-matched study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Beyond the sarcoma center: establishing the Sarcoma HASM network-a Hub and Spoke Model network for global integrated and precision care.ESMO open · 2024Article
- Article
- Prognostic nomogram in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a SEER-based study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Referral patterns of GIST patients: data from a nationwide study.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2024Article
- Pan-Canadian consensus recommendations for GIST management in high- and low-throughput centres across Canada.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Review
- Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the postimatinib era: A study based on the SEER database and a Chinese cohort.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- Anal canal gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST).BMJ case reports · 2023Article
- 2023 GEIS Guidelines for gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2023Review
- Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A single center analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The association between quality of surgery and overall survival in patients affected by localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is not completely understood. Objective: To assess the risk of death with and without imatinib according to microscopic margins status (R0/R1) using data from a randomized study on adjuvant imatinib. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a post hoc observational study on patients included in the randomized, open-label, phase III trial, performed between December 2004 and October 2008. Median follow-up was 9.1 years (IQR, 8-10 years). The study was performed at 112 hospitals in 12 countries. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of primary GIST, with intermediate or high risk of relapse; no evidence of residual disease after surgery; older than 18 years; and no prior malignancies or concurrent severe/uncontrolled medical conditions. Data were analyzed between July 17, 2017, and March 1, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized after surgery to either receive imatinib (400 mg/d) for 2 years or no adjuvant treatment. Randomization was stratified by center, risk category (high vs intermediate), tumor site (gastric vs other), and quality of surgery (R0 vs R1). Tumor rupture was included in the R1 category but also analyzed separately. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point of this substudy was overall survival (OS), estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared between R0/R1 using Cox models adjusted for treatment and stratification factors. Results: A total of 908 patients were included; 51.4% were men (465) and 48.6% were women (440), and the median age was 59 years (range, 18-89 years). One hundred sixty-two (17.8%) had an R1 resection, and 97 of 162 (59.9%) had tumor rupture. There was a significant difference in OS for patients undergoing an R1 vs R0 resection, overall (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05; 95% CI, 1.45-2.89) and by treatment arm (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.37-3.75 with adjuvant imatinib and HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.16-2.99 without adjuvant imatinib). When tumor rupture was excluded, this difference in OS between R1 and R0 resections disappeared (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.54-2.01). Conclusions and Relevance: The difference in OS by quality of surgery with or without imatinib was associated with the presence of tumor rupture. When the latter was excluded, the presence of R1 margins was not associated with worse OS. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00103168.
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.