Assessment of metastatic risk of gastric GIST based on treatment-naïve CT features
Abstract Objective To study whether the CT features of treatment-naïve gastric GIST may be used to assess metastatic risk. Methods In this IRB approved retrospective study, with informed consent waived, contrast enhanced CT images of 143 patients with pathologically confirmed treatment-naïve gastric...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of surgical oncology 2016-08, Vol.42 (8), p.1222-1228 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract Objective To study whether the CT features of treatment-naïve gastric GIST may be used to assess metastatic risk. Methods In this IRB approved retrospective study, with informed consent waived, contrast enhanced CT images of 143 patients with pathologically confirmed treatment-naïve gastric GIST (74 men, 69 women; mean age 61 years, SD ± 14) were reviewed in consensus by two oncoradiologists blinded to clinicopathologic features and clinical outcome and morphologic features were recorded. The metastatic spread was recorded using available imaging studies and electronic medical records (median follow up 40 months, interquartile range, IQR, 21–61). The association of maximum size in any plane (≤10 cm or >10 cm), outline (smooth or irregular/lobulated), cystic areas (≤50% or >50%), exophytic component (≤50% or >50%), and enhancing solid component (present or absent) with metastatic disease were analyzed using univariate (Fisher's exact test) and multivariate (logistic regression) analysis. Results Metastatic disease developed in 42 (29%) patients (28 at presentation, 14 during follow-up); 23 (16%) patients died. On multivariate analysis, tumor size >10 cm (p = 0.0001, OR 9.9), irregular/lobulated outline (p = 0.001, OR 5.6) and presence of a enhancing solid component (p 5–≤10 cm (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0748-7983 1532-2157 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.03.032 |