Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2025

Laparoscopy-endoscopy Cooperative Surgery for the Treatment of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Published on: February 19, 2022
Utilization of neoadjuvant therapy for localized gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors and the association with
Lauren M Janczewski1, Dominic J Vitello1, Samantha C Warwar1
1Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States; Northwestern Quality Improvement, Research, & Education in Surgery (NQUIRES), Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Background:
For gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), neoadjuvant imatinib is most often reserved for tumors near the gastroesophageal junction, multivisceral involvement, or limited metastatic disease. Whether localized gastric GISTs benefit from neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains unknown. We sought to examine factors associated with NAT utilization for localized gastric GISTs and evaluate implications on survival.
Methods:
The National Cancer Database identified patients with localized gastric GISTs treated with NAT (2010-2020), excluding tumors extending beyond the gastric wall, located in the cardia, or with metastatic disease. Multivariable logistic regression assessed characteristics of NAT use. After 1:1 propensity score matching, Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression assessed overall survival (OS).
Results:
Of 7203 patients, 762 (10.6%) received NAT followed by resection. On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor size was associated with NAT use (<2.0 cm vs 2.0-5.0 cm [odds ratio {OR}, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.19-3.47; P = .010] vs >5 cm [OR, 16.87; 95% CI, 10.02-28.40; P < .001]). After propensity score matching, 1506 patients remained. Median OS for NAT was 46.0 months vs 43.0 months for resection (P = .059), which was independently predictive of improved survival on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.99; P = .041). Subgroup analysis by tumor size showed no survival differences for tumors <2.0 cm or from 2.0 to 5.0 cm. Median OS was higher for tumors > 5.0 cm treated with NAT (NAT, 45.4 months [IQR, 29.5-65.9] vs upfront resection, 42.3 months [IQR 26.9-62.8]) and associated with improved survival on multivariable analysis (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99; P = .040).
Conclusion:
Although patients who received NAT had improved survival, this was primarily due to tumors >5.0 cm. Expanding NAT selection criteria to include localized gastric GISTs >5.0 cm may improve outcomes and warrants investigation through clinical trials.
More Related Videos
10:28Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT
Published on: January 22, 2018
10:31Intraoperative Gastroscopy for Tumor Localization in Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Adenocarcinoma
Published on: August 9, 2016