Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of F-18-FDG-PET/CT on treatment decision making in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients.Methods This study... Show moreAim The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of F-18-FDG-PET/CT on treatment decision making in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients.Methods This study retrospectively evaluated F-18-FDG-PET/CT scans to monitor response of metastatic GIST patients treated with palliative intent. Data from the Dutch GIST Registry was used. Early scans (< 10 weeks after start of treatment) and late scans (> 10 weeks after start of treatment) were scored on the impact in change of treatment.Results Sixty-one PET/CTscans were performed for treatment evaluation in 39 patients with metastatic GIST of which 36 were early scans and 25 were late scans. Early PET/CT scans led to a change in management in 5.6 % of patients and late PET/CT scans led to a change in management in 56 % of patients. Change in management was more often seen after scans with lack of metabolic response (48 % vs. 11 % in scans with metabolic response, p = 0.002). Neither metabolic response nor change in treatment were more often seen in patients with KIT mutations compared to patients with non-KIT mutations (metabolic response 65 % KIT vs. 46 % non-KIT, p = 0.33, and change in management 28 % KIT vs. 21 % nonKIT, p = 0.74).Conclusion(18)F-FDG-PET/CT is not recommended for early response evaluation in an unselected patient population with metastatic GIST, since it does not influence treatment decisions. F-18-FDG- PET/ CT, however, can be useful for late response assessment, especially in case of indeterminate CT results. Show less
Mohammadi, M.; IJzerman, N.S.; Hohenberger, P.; Rutkowski, P.; Jones, R.L.; Martin-Broto, J.; ... ; Schrage, Y. 2021
Background: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological... Show moreBackground: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological features and outcomes in patients with primary oesophageal GIST from seven European countries were collected retrospectively.Results: Eighty-three patients were identified, and median follow up was 55.0 months. At diagnosis, 59.0% had localized disease, 25.3% locally advanced and 13.3% synchronous metastasis. A biopsy (Fine Needle aspiration n = 29, histological biopsy n = 31) was performed in 60 (72.3%) patients. The mitotic count was low (<5 mitoses/50 High Power Fields (HPF)) in 24 patients and high (>= 5 mitoses/50 HPF) in 27 patients. Fifty-one (61.4%) patients underwent surgical or endoscopic resection. The most common reasons to not perform an immediate resection (n = 31) were; unresectable or metastasized GIST, performance status/comorbidity, patient refusal or ongoing neo-adjuvant therapy. The type of resections were enucleation (n = 11), segmental resection (n = 6) and oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction (n = 33), with median tumour size of 3.3 cm, 4.5 cm and 7.7 cm, respectively. In patients treated with enucleation 18.2% developed recurrent disease. The recurrence rate in patients treated with segmental resection was 16.7% and in patients undergoing oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction 36.4%. Larger tumours (>= 4.0 cm) and high (>5/5hpf) mitotic count were associated with worse disease free survival.Conclusion: Based on the current study, enucleation can be recommended for oesophageal GIST smaller than 4 cm, while oesophagectomy should be preserved for larger tumours. Patients with larger tumours (>4 cm) and/or high mitotic count should be treated with adjuvant therapy. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Mohammadi, M.; IJzerman, N.S.; Hohenberger, P.; Rutkowski, P.; Jones, R.L.; Martin-Broto, J.; ... ; Schrage, Y. 2021
Background: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological... Show moreBackground: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological features and outcomes in patients with primary oesophageal GIST from seven European countries were collected retrospectively.Results: Eighty-three patients were identified, and median follow up was 55.0 months. At diagnosis, 59.0% had localized disease, 25.3% locally advanced and 13.3% synchronous metastasis. A biopsy (Fine Needle aspiration n = 29, histological biopsy n = 31) was performed in 60 (72.3%) patients. The mitotic count was low (<5 mitoses/50 High Power Fields (HPF)) in 24 patients and high (>= 5 mitoses/50 HPF) in 27 patients. Fifty-one (61.4%) patients underwent surgical or endoscopic resection. The most common reasons to not perform an immediate resection (n = 31) were; unresectable or metastasized GIST, performance status/comorbidity, patient refusal or ongoing neo-adjuvant therapy. The type of resections were enucleation (n = 11), segmental resection (n = 6) and oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction (n = 33), with median tumour size of 3.3 cm, 4.5 cm and 7.7 cm, respectively. In patients treated with enucleation 18.2% developed recurrent disease. The recurrence rate in patients treated with segmental resection was 16.7% and in patients undergoing oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction 36.4%. Larger tumours (>= 4.0 cm) and high (>5/5hpf) mitotic count were associated with worse disease free survival.Conclusion: Based on the current study, enucleation can be recommended for oesophageal GIST smaller than 4 cm, while oesophagectomy should be preserved for larger tumours. Patients with larger tumours (>4 cm) and/or high mitotic count should be treated with adjuvant therapy. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Boonstra, P.A.; Steeghs, N.; Farag, S.; Coevorden, F. van; Gelderblom, H.; Grunhagen, D.J.; ... ; Etten, B. van 2019
Background: A cohort of 201 patients with small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) treated between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2016 in five GIST expertise centers in the... Show moreBackground: A cohort of 201 patients with small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) treated between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2016 in five GIST expertise centers in the Netherlands was analyzed. Goal of this study was to describe the clinical, surgical and pathological characteristics of this rare subpopulation of GIST patients, registered in the Dutch GIST registry.Methods: Clinical outcomes and risk factors of patients with small bowel GIST who underwent surgery or treated with systemic therapy were analyzed. A classification was made based on disease status at diagnosis (localized vs. metastasized).Results: 201 patients with small bowel GIST were registered of which 138 patients (69%) were diagnosed with localized disease and 63 patients (31%) with metastatic disease. Approximately 19% of the patients had emergency surgery, and in 22% GIST was an accidental finding. In patients with high risk localized disease, recurrence occurred less often in patients who received adjuvant treatment (4/32) compared to patients who did not (20/31, p < 0.01). Disease progression during palliative imatinib treatment occurred in 23 patients (28%) after a median of 20.7 (range 1.8-47.1) months. Ongoing response was established in 52/82 patients on first line palliative treatment with imatinib after a median treatment time of 30.6 (range 2.5-155.3) months.Conclusion: Patients with small-bowel GIST more frequently present with metastatic disease when compared to patients with gastric GIST in literature. We advocate for Prospective registration of these patients and investigate the use of surgery in patients with limited metastatic disease. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Farag, S.; Geus-Oei, L.F. de; Graaf, W.T. van der; Coevorden, F. van; Grunhagen, D.; Reyners, A.K.L.; ... ; Steeghs, N. 2018
