1
|
Khan SI, O’Sullivan NJ, Temperley HC, Rausa E, Mehigan BJ, McCormick P, Larkin JO, Kavanagh DO, Kelly ME. Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours (GIST) of the Rectum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Curr Oncol 2022; 30:416-429. [PMID: 36661683 PMCID: PMC9857930 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30010034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2022] [Revised: 12/11/2022] [Accepted: 12/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) have many treatment options, but uncertainty remains regarding the best treatment regimen for this rare pathology. The aim of this review is to assess the optimal management approach including timing of chemotherapy. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles comparing the impact of radical vs. local excision, and neoadjuvant vs. adjuvant therapy had on outcomes in the management of rectal GISTs. We specifically evaluated the influence that the aforementioned factors had on margins, recurrence, overall survival, 5-year disease-free survival, and hospital length of stay. Results: Twenty-eight studies met our predefined criteria and were included in our study, twelve of which were included in the quantitative synthesis. When comparing neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy, our meta-analysis noted no significance in terms of margin negativity (R0) (odds ratio [OR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7−5.79, p = 0.20) or recurrence rates (OR 0.22, 95% CI, 0.02−1.91, p = 0.17). However, there was a difference in overall 5-year survival in favour of neoadjuvant therapy (OR 3.19, 95% CI, 1.37−7.40, * p = 0.007). Comparing local excision versus radical excision, our meta-analysis observed no significance in terms of overall 5-year survival (OR1.31, 95% CI, 0.81−2.12, p = 0.26), recurrence (OR 0.67, 95% CI, 0.40−1.13, p = 0.12), or 5-year disease-free survival (OR 1.10, 95% CI, 0.55−2.19, p = 0.80). There was a difference in length of hospital stay with a reduced mean length of stay in local excision group (mean difference [MD] 6.74 days less in the LE group; 95% CI, −6.92−−6.56, * p =< 0.00001) as well as a difference in R0 rates in favour of radical resection (OR 0.68, 95% CI, 0.47−0.99, * p = 0.05). Conclusion: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved overall 5-year survival, while local excision is associated with reduced mean length of hospital stay. Further large-volume, prospective studies are required to further define the optimal treatment regimen in this complex pathology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Niall J. O’Sullivan
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, D24 NR0A Dublin, Ireland
| | - Hugo C. Temperley
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
| | - Emanuele Rausa
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Brian J. Mehigan
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland
| | - Paul McCormick
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland
| | - John O. Larkin
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland
| | - Dara O. Kavanagh
- Royal College of Surgeons, D02 YN77 Dublin, Ireland
- Department of Surgery, Tallaght University Hospital, D24 NR0A Dublin, Ireland
| | - Michael E. Kelly
- Department of Surgery, St James’s Hospital, D08 NHY1 Dublin, Ireland
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Li W, Li X, Yu K, Xiao B, Peng J, Zhang R, Zhang L, Wang K, Pan Z, Li C, Wu X. Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant imatinib therapy for patients with locally advanced rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A multi-center cohort study. Front Pharmacol 2022; 13:950101. [PMID: 36238544 PMCID: PMC9552070 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.950101] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Several issues on neoadjuvant imatinib therapy remain controversial despite its widespread application for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). We aimed to describe the clinicopathological characteristics of this specific population, and compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes between patients with or without neoadjuvant imatinib therapy. Patients and methods: A cohort of 58 consecutive locally advanced rectal GIST patients receiving surgical treatment between January 2007 and July 2019 at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and Yunnan Cancer Hospital was retrospectively analyzed. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Results: There were 33 (56.9%) patients who received neoadjuvant imatinib therapy. Among them, 20 (60.6%) patients had partial response (PR) as their best response, 11 (33.3%) patients had stable disease (SD), and 2 (6.1%) patients had progressive disease (PD). The median tumor size reduced from 5.2 to 4.0 cm after treatment (p < 0.001), and an attained “maximal response” was primarily achieved (32/33) on the 12th month after treatment. The most common adverse event was anemia. There were 27 adverse events occurred, most of which were grade 1 (19/27). With respect to intraoperative and postoperative surgical outcomes, no significant difference was found between patients with or without neoadjuvant Imatinib therapy except that patients with neoadjuvant treatment had a significant higher rate of preventive ileostomy (p = 0.004). Patients received neoadjuvant treatment had a superior 2-years RFS outcome than those without, though the difference was no significant (91.7% vs. 78.9%, p = 0.203). There were no significant differences in the 2-years OS rates (95.2% vs. 91.3%, p = 0.441). Conclusion: Neoadjuvant imatinib therapy is an effective and safe treatment for locally advanced rectal GISTs. Further studies are warranted to validate the long-term prognostic benefit for patients with rectal GISTs receiving neoadjuvant imatinib therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Weihao Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xinyue Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Kun Yu
- Department of Colorectal Cancer Surgery, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China
| | - Binyi Xiao
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jianhong Peng
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Rongxin Zhang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
| | - Lingfang Zhang
- Department of Colorectal Cancer Surgery, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China
| | - Kun Wang
- Department of Colorectal Cancer Surgery, Yunnan Cancer Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China
| | - Zhizhong Pan
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- *Correspondence: Zhizhong Pan, ; Cong Li, ; Xiaojun Wu,
| | - Cong Li
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- *Correspondence: Zhizhong Pan, ; Cong Li, ; Xiaojun Wu,
| | - Xiaojun Wu
- State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China
- *Correspondence: Zhizhong Pan, ; Cong Li, ; Xiaojun Wu,
| |
Collapse
|