ArticleCancer medicine2025
A Retrospective Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Imatinib for Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor in Elderly Patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) occurs predominantly in the elderly population. However, clinical data on the outcomes of treatment with imatinib in elderly patients are limited. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of imatinib for advanced GIST in the elderly population compared with the non-elderly population.
methodsWe analyzed the clinical data of patients who received imatinib as first-line treatment for advanced GIST at our hospital between January 2010 and July 2023. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events were compared between elderly patients (age ≥ 70 years, E group) and non-elderly patients (age < 70 years, NE group).
resultData of 91 patients (E group, n = 32; NE group, n = 59) with a median follow-up of 39.8 months were analyzed. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the E group required a reduced starting dose of imatinib (34% vs. 2%, p < 0.001). Median PFS was 29.4 months in the E group and 60.0 months in the NE group (hazard ratio [HR] 2.04, p = 0.04, log-rank test); median OS was 91.5 months in the E group and not reached in the NE group (HR 2.72, p = 0.03, log-rank test). Multivariable analysis identified age as an independent prognostic factor for PFS (HR 2.26, p = 0.03) and a trend towards worse OS with increasing age (HR 2.93, p = 0.06). Grade 2 or higher non-hematological adverse events were more prevalent in the E group (78% vs. 32%, p < 0.001).
conclusionImatinib is an effective treatment for advanced GIST in elderly patients. However, elderly patients were associated with poorer efficacy and a Higher incidence of toxicities due to imatinib compared with non-elderly patients.
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.