ArticleCancer medicine2022
Diagnosing gastrointestinal stromal tumors: The utility of fine-needle aspiration cytology versus biopsy.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2022. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic profiling in GIST: Implications in clinical outcome and future challenges.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Review
- Diagnosing gastrointestinal stromal tumors: The utility of fine-needle aspiration cytology versus biopsy.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Minimally Invasive Cytopathology and Accurate Diagnosis: Technical Procedures and Ancillary Techniques.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are mesenchymal tumors in the intestinal tract originating from a precursor to the interstitial cells of Cajal, which plays a role in gastric motility. The preoperative diagnosis of GIST may be very important for the surgical approach or the need for neoadjuvant treatment and is often done in conjunction with molecular testing.
designGISTs diagnosed in Stockholm between 1999 and 2019 with biopsy and/or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) material were included. Clinical and tumor characteristics, as well as sample representability, ancillary techniques, diagnostic accuracy, and time to diagnosis, were categorized and compared.
resultsWe identified 460 diagnostic samples from 347 patients, consisting of 212 biopsies and 248 FNAs. FNA cytology had a significantly (p < 0.05) better sample representability (92% vs. 77%), diagnostic accuracy (84% vs. 76%), and shorter time to diagnosis (4.5 vs. 12.3 days on average) in comparison with biopsies. In addition, ancillary techniques such as immunochemistry and molecular analysis for KIT and PDGFRA mutations could satisfactorily be performed on FNA materials.
conclusionsThere are advantages to both biopsy and FNA cytology in diagnosing GISTs. While the significantly shorter time to diagnosis for FNA cytology can be due to institutional differences, its many strengths make it both an accurate and time-efficient method for preoperative diagnosis of GIST.
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.