ArticleScientific reports2026
A novel risk-scoring system based on endoscopic ultrasound and clinical characteristics for the preoperative diagnosis of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The preoperative differentiation of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) from other submucosal lesions remains clinically challenging due to overlapping endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features. This study aimed to develop and validate a novel risk-scoring system integrating EUS imaging and clinical characteristics to improve preoperative diagnostic accuracy for small gastric GISTs versus non-GIST submucosal tumors. We retrospectively analyzed 1303 patients with gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs), who were divided into a training cohort (n = 670), an internal validation cohort (n = 287), and an external validation cohort (n = 346). Clinical and EUS characteristics were compared between small GISTs and non-GIST SMTs. Independent predictive factors identified through multivariate logistic regression were used to construct a risk-scoring model. The model’s diagnostic performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and accuracy. Small gastric GISTs accounted for 614 cases (47.1%). Four independent predictors were identified: tumor location in the cardia/fundus (1 points), origin within the muscularis propria (2 points), hypoechoic echogenicity (1 point), and extraluminal growth pattern (2 points). The scoring system demonstrated strong discriminatory power, with AUCs of 0.776 (95%CI: 0.727–0.826) in the internal and 0.844 (95%CI: 0.805–0.884) in the external validation cohorts. Sensitivities were 0.867 (95%CI: 0.800–0.918) and 0.828 (95%CI: 0.767–0.878), and NPVs were 0.827 and 0.785, respectively. Risk stratification revealed that in the internal cohort, 17.3% of lesions were low-risk (0–2 points), 52.8% intermediate-risk (3–4 points), and 96.2% high-risk (5–6 points). Corresponding proportions in the external cohort were 21.5%, 73.9%, and 95.0%. The proposed EUS-based risk-scoring system shows robust performance in preoperatively diagnosing small gastric GISTs. It holds promise for improving clinical decision-making and optimizing treatment strategies by enabling non-invasive and accurate risk stratification.
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.