Perspective on updated treatment guidelines for patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and present predominantly in middle-aged and older individuals. Historically, the outlook for patients with GISTs was very poor because of the general lack of efficacy of conventional chemotherapy and the often limited surgical options. However, the recognition of the role of mutations of the v-kit Hardy/Zuckerman 4 feline sarcoma viral oncogene homolog KIT and the platelet derived growth factor receptor alpha gene PDGFRα in the development of GISTs led to the evaluation of potential antitumor effects of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors imatinib and, more recently, sunitinib. Consequently, these molecularly targeted therapies were introduced into clinical practice, and the outcome for patients with GISTs improved considerably. In the last few years, the European Society of Medical Oncology, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and the Canadian Advisory Committee on GIST each published a major set of guidelines or practice recommendations for the management of patients with GIST. In the current review, the latest recommendations from each organization are summarized in terms of diagnosis and risk assessment, tumor staging, surgical and/or drug treatment of primary resectable and recurrent metastatic disease, and patient follow-up and assessment. In addition, areas of consensus and points of divergence among the guidelines are highlighted along with any unresolved issues.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".