The impact of incidental gastrointestinal stromal tumours on patients undergoing resection of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest asymptomatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract are not uncommon. We sought to determine their incidence in patients undergoing resection for UGI neoplasms and their impact on surgical and adjuvant treatment. METHODS: We accessed a database prospectively listing all patients undergoing resection of non-GIST neoplasms of the stomach and esophagus at a single university centre over a 4.5-year period and reviewed pathology reports for the presence of synchronous GISTs in the UGI tract. We compared patient demographic and tumour characteristics, operative procedures and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: In all, 207 patients undergoing gastrectomy or esophagectomy for non- GIST neoplasms were included. We identified 15 synchronous GISTs in the UGI tract of 11 (5.3%) patients (1 preoperatively, 4 intraoperatively and 10 on final pathology), with an average age of 67 years. Most patients were men. Additional resections were required for GISTs identified pre- or intraoperatively. Final pathology revealed completely resected c-kit positive tumours of an average size of 0.5 (range 0.1-4.0) cm with low or very low risk of malignant potential. No patients received adjuvant therapy for the GISTs. After a median follow-up of 11 (range 2-36) months, 5 patients died from their primary cancer, 3 were alive with primary cancer recurrence, and 3 were alive without disease. No patients experienced GIST recurrence. CONCLUSION: Incidentally finding a synchronous GIST during resection of UGI neoplasms is not uncommon; it may alter surgical treatment but is unlikely to impact longterm survival.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".