Experiences and perspectives on the GIST patient journey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib has improved outcomes for patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and for patients receiving adjuvant therapy following GIST resection. This qualitative study explored the experiences and emotions of patients through GIST diagnosis, treatment initiation, disease control, and in some patients, loss of response and therapy switch. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ethnographic investigations were conducted, including semi- structured qualitative interviews of patients with resected or metastatic/unresectable GIST and their caregivers, from Canada (n = 15); the United States (n = 10); and Brazil, France, Germany, Russia, and Spain (n = 5 each). Some interviewees also kept 7-day photo journals. Responses were qualitatively analyzed to identify gaps and unmet needs where communication about disease, treatments, and adherence could be effective. RESULTS: Patients shared common experiences during each stage of disease management (crisis, hope, adaptation, new normal, and uncertainty). Patients felt a sense of crisis during diagnosis, followed by hope upon TKI therapy initiation. Over time, they came to adapt to their new lives (new normal) with cancer. With each follow-up, patients confronted the uncertainty of becoming TKI resistant and the possible need to switch therapy. During uncertainty many patients sought new information regarding GIST. Cases of disease progression and drug switching caused patients to revert to crisis and restart their emotional journey. Patients with primary or unresectable/metastatic GIST shared similar journeys, especially regarding uncertainty, although differences in the scope and timing of phases were observed. Strategies patients used to remain adherent included obtaining family support, setting reminder mechanisms, taking medicine at routine times, and storing medicine in prominent places. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians and support staff can manage patient expectations and encourage adherence to therapy, which may facilitate optimal patient outcomes. Patient education about current GIST developments and adherence across all phases of the patient journey are of benefit.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".