Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: Consensus Statement on Diagnosis and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the multidisciplinary management of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs), there is a need to coordinate the efforts of pathology, radiology, surgery and oncology. Surgery is the mainstay for resectable nonmetastatic GISTs, but virtually all GISTs are associated with a risk of metastasis. Imatinib 400 mg/day with or without surgery is the recommended first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic GIST; a higher dose may be considered in patients who progress, develop secondary resistance or present with specific genotypic characteristics. Adjuvant or neoadjuvant imatinib is not advised for resectable nonmetastatic GISTs. Neoadjuvant imatinib may be considered when surgery would result in significant morbidity or loss of organ function. Follow-up computed tomography imaging is recommended every three to six months for at least five years. Patients with metastatic disease should be continued on imatinib due to the high risk of recurrence on discontinuation of therapy. Treatment should be continued until there is progression or intolerable adverse effects. If dose escalation with imatinib fails, a clinical trial with novel agents alone or in combination may be considered. The present recommendations were developed at a surgical subcommittee meeting and a subsequent full Advisory Committee meeting held in Toronto, Ontario, in April 2005, under the sponsorship of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".