ArticleOncology letters2024
Radiofrequency ablation vs. hepatectomy for liver metastases from gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
Article in Oncology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and liver metastases, there is still debate about whether radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or hepatectomy is preferable. The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of RFA with hepatectomy in patients with GISTs and liver metastases. The present retrospective study consisted of a cohort of 43 patients who had been diagnosed with liver metastases from GISTs between January 2010 and December 2022. The study included 18 patients who received RFA combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy (RFA group) and 25 patients who underwent hepatectomy combined with TKI therapy (hepatectomy group). For the patients with liver metastases, the progression-free survival (PFS) rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 66.5, 38.2 and 33.9%, respectively. Notably, patients in the hepatectomy group exhibited significantly improved PFS times compared with those in the RFA group (median PFS, 42.7 months vs. 14.3 months; P=0.034). Furthermore, the time to imatinib treatment failure (TTF) was notably improved in the hepatectomy group compared with that in the RFA group, and this difference was statistically significant (median TTF, 71.1 vs. 38.0 months; P=0.041). However, the overall survival (OS) times of patients who received RFA and those who had hepatectomy did not differ significantly (median OS, not reached vs. not reached, P=0.120). There was no statistically significant distinction in PFS and TTF between patients who underwent hepatectomy combined with postoperative TKI and those who underwent hepatectomy combined with perioperative TKI (median PFS, 29.5 vs. not reached; P=0.520; median TTF, 66.4 months vs. 71.1 months; P=0.430). The univariate and multivariate analyses consistently identified the sole prognostic factor affecting PFS as hepatectomy combined with TKI therapy (hazard ratio, 0.379; 95% CI, 0.159-0.899; P=0.028). In conclusion, hepatectomy combined with TKI therapy improved prognosis for patients with liver metastases to a greater extent than RFA combined with TKI therapy. For this type of patient, hepatectomy may be a preferable option.
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.