Abstract

Background & AimsA significant benefit of imatinib adjuvant therapy for patients with high risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) has been confirmed. However, the effect of imatinib adjuvant therapy for intermediate-risk GIST has not been well studied. In this article, we compare differences of recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates between patients with intermediate-risk GIST who accepted imatinib adjuvant therapy and those who did not.MethodA retrospective study of intermediate-risk GIST was conducted in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, China. The pathology reports of 112 patients who had been treated by surgery showed intermediate-risk GIST. The treatment and control groups were designed according to the administration of imatinib adjuvant therapy (≥1 year). Survival and recurrence data were collected and RFS of each group was calculated.ResultsEighty fivepatients with intermediate-risk GIST were followed up. Thirty of them (treatment group) accepted imatinib adjuvant therapy over 1 year. Through comparing the RFS of the two groups, we established that there was no statistically significant difference in RFS rates (P=0.940).ConclusionThere is no significant benefit for patients with intermediate-risk GIST to accept imatinib adjuvant treatment.

Highlights

  • ResultsEighty fivepatients with intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) were followed up. Thirty of them (treatment group) accepted imatinib adjuvant therapy over 1 year

  • There is no significant benefit for patients with intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) to accept imatinib adjuvant treatment

  • Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most common sarcoma of the intestinal tract [1,2,3,4,5], which are believed to originate from the interstitial cells of Cajal, the pacemaker cells of the gastrointestinal tract [6, 7]

Read more

Summary

Results

Eighty fivepatients with intermediate-risk GIST were followed up. Thirty of them (treatment group) accepted imatinib adjuvant therapy over 1 year. Through comparing the RFS of the two groups, we established that there was no statistically significant difference in RFS rates (P=0.940)

INTRODUCTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.