ArticleBJS open2022
Clinical outcomes of surgical and imatinib treatment for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumours: retrospective cohort study.
Article in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transanal local excision reduces surgical burden without evidence of increased recurrence in lower rectal GIST: a multicenter inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Identification of Risk Factors in Postoperative Urinary Dysfunction for Rectal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRectal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are rare and treated mainly by radical surgery. Although the importance of perioperative imatinib has been recognized, there are few reports on its outcomes.
methodConsecutive patients diagnosed with rectal GISTs between July 2008 and February 2021 were identified from a prospective database. Effects of perioperative imatinib were investigated, and surgical and survival outcomes were compared between neoadjuvant imatinib and upfront surgery.
results34 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. Compared with upfront surgery (n = 11), the neoadjuvant imatinib group (n = 23) had significantly larger tumours (median size 8.3 versus 2.5 cm; P = 0.01) and included a significantly greater proportion of high-risk patients according to the modified Fletcher classification (20/23 (87.0%) versus 6/11 (54.5%); P = 0.02). Comparing the operation planned based on imaging before neoadjuvant imatinib and the operation performed, there was an increase in sphincter-preserving surgery (4/23 (17.4%) to 11/23 (47.8%); P = 0.02), abdominoperineal resection 11/23 (47.8%) reduced to 7/23 (30.4%); P = 0.13) and total pelvic exenteration reduced from 8/23 (34.8%) to 5/23 (21.7%); P = 0.01). Tumours were downsized by a median of 30 per cent (range 0 per cent to -56 per cent; P = 0.01). During follow-up (median 42, range 5-131 months), there was no postoperative recurrence in 29 patients who received perioperative imatinib. One of the five patients who underwent surgery without neoadjuvant or adjuvant imatinib developed local recurrence.
conclusionTreatment with imatinib for rectal GISTs seems to improve outcomes, and neoadjuvant imatinib increases the rate of sphincter-preserving surgery.
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.