ArticleThe oncologist2025
Clinicopathological characteristics of progressive gastrointestinal stromal tumors and heterogeneity analyses of secondary mutations.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- KIT Mutation-NTRK fusion oncogenic driver switch: a novel mechanism of acquired imatinib resistance in GIST.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- A New Paradigm of Bispecific Antibodies in Clinical Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Intratumoral and Peritumoral Radiomics based on Contrast-enhanced CT Images: Biomarkers to Predict the Risk-Grade of Gastrointestinal Stromal TumorsCurrent medical imaging · 2026Article
- Microenvironment and Tumor Heterogeneity as Pharmacological Targets in Precision Oncology.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough there have been multiple lines of drugs for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), the drug response depends on the progressive tumors' biological behaviors and secondary mutations.
methodsWe investigated the primary and secondary mutations in multiple tumors from the same patients and at multiple regions from the same tumor to analyze the inter- and intratumoral heterogeneities using Sanger sequencing and next-generation sequencing (NGS).
resultsSecondary mutations were more frequently detected in patients with a targeted therapy history and who continued their targeted therapy until surgery or biopsy, in larger tumors, and in tumors located in the intestine, abdominal cavity, and mesentery. Secondary mutations were detected in only 57.5% of the samples from the cases with secondary mutations, and 34.8% of the cases presented multiple types of secondary mutations, including both intertumoral and intratumoral heterogeneities. Temporal heterogeneity was also observed at different time points of progression. The results of NGS and Sanger sequencing were consistent for the individual sample, but Sanger sequencing detected multiple types of secondary mutations from different tumors of the same patient. Liquid biopsy also only detected partial secondary mutations revealed by Sanger sequencing.
conclusionProgressive GISTs had intertumoral and intratumoral heterogeneities of secondary mutations. Sanger sequencing had its own advantage in revealing the heterogeneity of secondary mutations. The improvement in the detection rate of secondary mutations by selecting the appropriate tumor sample to be tested, or even the appropriate tumor region or test method, is helpful to identify the optimal drugs for progressive GISTs.
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.