ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Long-term outcomes of endoscopic treatment versus surgical resection for 0-2 cm gastrointestinal stromal tumor: A SEER database study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal management of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) ≤ 2 cm in diameter remains debated. This study aimed to compare long-term survival outcomes between patients with small GIST undergoing endoscopic treatment (ET) and those treated with surgical resection (SR).
methodsBetween 2000 and 2021, patients with small GIST were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to minimize selection bias in the comparison process. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were applied to evaluate the effects of demographic and clinical characteristics on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).
resultsA total of 1400 patients with small GIST were included, comprising 470 (33.57%) undergoing ET and 930 (66.43%) receiving SR. The 5-year OS and CSS rates were compared between the ET and SR groups both before and after PSM. Before PSM, the 5-year OS rates were 75.28% vs. 83.96% (P = 0.878), and CSS rates were 94.38% vs. 95.09% (P = 0.284). After PSM, the corresponding rates were 85.81% vs. 86.45% (P = 0.393) for OS and 96.77% vs. 95.48% (P = 0.075) for CSS. Multivariable analysis adjusting for covariates demonstrated comparable risks of OS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.74-1.24, P = 0.737) and CSS (HR = 1.26, 95% CI 0.72-2.20, P = 0.426) between the two treatment groups. No significant differences were observed between the groups after PSM.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate comparable long-term OS and CSS outcomes between endoscopic and surgical treatment groups in patients with GIST ≤ 2 cm in diameter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40369280What 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.