A278 SMALL GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS (GIST): A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF EUS SURVEILLANCE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the GI tract. They are often noted incidentally at endoscopy or cross sectional imaging. Following their identification, further investigation via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), often with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) confirms diagnosis. The natural history and appropriate management of small (<2 cm) GISTs is not well understood and in 2010 the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommended surveillance EUS every 6–12 months. To determine if our management strategy for <2cm GISTs was consistent with present guidelines. Secondary outcomes were to identify barriers to surveillance and determine the natural history of GIST. A retrospective chart review of all EUS procedures at St. Paul’s Hospital (SPH) and Vancouver General Hospital (VGH), Vancouver, Canada was completed from 01/05-06/17 and 01/12-06/17 respectively. Individuals with <2cm GISTs were identified. A GIST was defined as a hypoechoic lesion arising from the 2nd or 4th layer of the GI wall +/- cytologic or histologic diagnosis. Data collected included patient demographics, clinical presentation, initial and subsequent EUS findings, interval between EUS, reasons for not undergoing surveillance EUS, and pathology. Candidates were collated based on the presence of GISTs and whether appropriate follow-up occurred based on NCCN guidelines. This study was approved by the IRB at SPH and VGH. GISTs were identified by EUS in 199 patients, 94 (47%) had lesions <2 cm in size. Mean age at diagnosis was 64 years (SD:12.6). 77% were referred due to incidental findings at initial endoscopy and 23% were referred based on CT imaging. GISTs identified were located in the stomach and esophagus. Of the 94 patients with <2cm GISTs, surveillance was recommended in 86 (92%) and 69 (80%) had at least one surveillance EUS. Of the 17 patients surveillance was recommended but not completed, the barrier was not identified. Over the review period, there was an improvement in surveillance adherence to 100%. During a median follow-up of 6 yrs (1–10), 66 (96%) lesions remained unchanged in size and 3 increased in size. Of these 3 lesions, 1 exceeded 2cm in size but remained stable over serial examinations. Of the 69 patients with <2cm GISTs, 3 were referred to surgery for high risk features. No patients with <2cm lesions developed unresectable disease. SPH and VGH endosonographers recommendations for surveillance of <2cm GISTs agreed with current guidelines in 92% of patients. Adherence to recommendations improved to 100% over the study. Rate of progression of <2cm GISTs is very low and evidence supports that surveillance intervals can be increased for patients with small GISTs that have been stable over serial examinations. None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».