ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2020
Which size is the best cutoff for primary small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor?
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk stratification for 1- to 2-cm gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: visual assessment of CT and EUS high-risk features versus CT radiomics analysis.European radiology · 2023Trial
- Small Gastric Stromal Tumors: An Underestimated Risk.Cancers · 2022Article
- Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe biological behavior of primary small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (gGIST) is indolent. The cutoff size categorizing small gGIST continues to be controversial. To date, there is no consensus regarding whether it should be 1 cm, 2 cm, or another size. We aimed to find a new cutoff size.
methodsRetrospective clinicopathological and prognosis data of patients with small gGIST from January 1998 to January 2015 were collected among five medical centers in southern China. Tumor size was divided into two groups: <1 cm (Mirco group) and 1-2 cm (Small group). We compared the clinicopathological index and prognosis between these two groups and identified a new cutoff size to define small gGIST.
resultsDuring this 18-year period, there were 276 patients with primary small gGIST treated at these five medical centers. The range of tumor size was 0.2-2.0 cm. The median tumor size was 1.0 cm. The range of the mitotic count was 0-70/50 high power fields (HPFs) with counts ≤5/50 HPFs in 259 patients (93.8%), 5< counts ≤10/50 HPFs in 7 patients (2.5%), and counts >10/50 HPFs in 10 patients (3.6%). The median follow-up time was 38 months (3-156 months). The 5-year overall survival rate was 98.7% in the entire group. Using Pearson correlation analysis, there was a positive correlation between the mitotic count and tumor size as a continuous variable (r=0.164, P=0.006). There were 137 patients in the Micro group and 139 cases in the Small group. In the Micro group, mitotic counts were ≤5/50 HPFs in 134 patients, 5< counts ≤10/50 HPFs in 0 patients, and counts >10/50 HPFs in 3 patients; mitotic counts in the Small group were counts ≤5/50 HPFs in 125 patients, 5< counts ≤10/50 HPFs in 7 patients, >10/50 HPFs in 7 patients. There was a statistically significant difference between these two groups (P=0.002); the Small group had more intermediate/high-risk cases. Using the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve), we observed that 1.15 cm was the new cutoff size to separate low-risk cases and intermediate/high-risk cases (AUC =0.707, P=0.004, sensitivity =0.824, 1-specificity =0.429).
conclusionsPrimary small gGIST has a good prognosis; gGIST <1 cm can be regarded as benign tumors that only requires endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) follow-up. The proportion of potential intermediate/high-risk disease is high for patients with 1-2 cm gGIST. These patients should be treated with caution and the tumors should be resected if necessary. These results indicate that 1.15 cm may be the new cutoff size to separate small gGIST from large gGIST, but further studies are needed for verification.
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.