| Literature DB >> 29333308 |
Rebecca M Platoff1, William F Morano1, Luiz Marconcini2, Nicholas DeLeo1, Beth L Mapow3, Michael Styler2, Wilbur B Bowne1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Recurrence of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) after surgical resection and imatinib mesylate (IM) adjuvant therapy poses a significant treatment challenge. We present the case of a patient who underwent surgical resection after recurrence and review the current literature regarding treatment. CASEEntities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29333308 PMCID: PMC5733166 DOI: 10.1155/2017/8349090
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Case Rep Oncol Med
Figure 1Sagittal (a), axial (b), and coronal (c) images of CT with IV contrast showing the large, lobulated primary mass that was discovered in January 2013.
Figure 2Axial CT images demonstrating recurrent lesions (white arrows) in the left lower quadrant (a), adherent to the anterior abdominal wall (b), and in the right upper quadrant (c).
Figure 3(a) Gross specimen of right upper quadrant recurrent GIST lesion. (b) Anterior abdominal wall mass (white arrow) adherent to the resected loop of the small intestine. (c) Small nodule within the mesentery discovered on diagnostic laparoscopy and resected. (d) Gross specimen demonstrating necrotic sigmoid lesion (white arrow) adherent to resected sigmoid.
Institutional studies demonstrating benefit of TKI therapy for recurrent GIST.
| Study design | Number of patients | Primary endpoint | Main findings | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demetri et al. [ | Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, international trial comparing sunitinib versus placebo after imatinib failure | 321 (207 sunitinib versus 105 placebo patients) | Tumor progression | Median time to tumor progression: 27.3 weeks in patients receiving sunitinib versus 6.4 weeks with placebo |
|
| ||||
| MetaGIST [ | Analysis of two large, randomized, cooperative group studies comparing two doses of IM (400 mg daily versus twice daily) in 1640 patients with advanced GISTs | 1640 (data analysis after 344 and 321 cases of progression or death in each study) | PFS and OS | High-dose imatinib 800 mg daily improved PFS but not OS compared to imatinib 400 mg daily |
|
| ||||
| Reichardt et al. [ | Randomized phase III open-label trial comparing nilotinib versus best supportive care with advanced GIST following prior imatinib/sunitinib failure | 248 (2 : 1 randomization nilotinib or best supportive care) | PFS, OS | Subset analysis of patients with one prior regimen each of imatinib and sunitinib showed significant increase in median OS in favor of nilotinib versus best supportive care |
|
| ||||
| Demetri et al. [ | Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter, international trial comparing regorafenib versus placebo after imatinib/sunitinib failure | 199 (133 regorafenib versus 66 placebo patients) | PFS | Median PFS 4.8 months for regorafenib versus 0.9 months for placebo |
|
| ||||
| Seifert et al. [ | Analysis of 85 patients with GISTs to determine expression of immune checkpoint molecules and effects of combination IM + PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in murine GISTs | 85 (blood samples from patients with GISTs) | PD-1 receptor expression in T-cells of human GISTs | The PD-1 inhibitory receptors were upregulated on tumor-infiltrating T-cells compared with T-cells from matched blood |
| T-cell function in mice with GISTs treated with IM and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor | PD-1 expression on T-cells was highest in IM-treated human GISTs | |||
| PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in vivo had no efficacy alone but enhanced antitumor effects of IM by increasing T-cell effector function | ||||
IM = imatinib mesylate, PFS = progression-free survival, OS = overall survival.
Institutional studies demonstrating benefit of surgery for recurrent GIST.
| Study design | Number of patients | Primary endpoint | R0 resection | Main findings | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bischof et al. [ | Multi-institutional retrospective cohort | 158 (87 locally advanced, 71 recurrent/metastatic) | RFS, OS | 69% (recurrent/metastatic) versus 87.4% (locally advanced) | TKI-sensitive recurrent/metastatic disease—improved RFS, OS after surgery |
|
| |||||
| Du et al. [ | Phase III multicenter trial for recurrent/metastatic on IM +/− surgery for residual disease | 41 (19 IM + surgery, 22 IM alone) | PFS | 73.6% | Trend towards improved PFS in surgery group |
|
| |||||
| Tan et al. [ | Retrospective cohort—upfront surgery versus TKI for recurrence | 186 (56 recurrent—30 resectable, 24 underwent surgery for recurrence) | DFS, OS | 75% (18 of 24) in upfront surgery group | Improved OS and DFS with surgery |
|
| |||||
| Chang et al. [ | Prospectively collected retrospective review—imatinib + surgery (early versus late groups) versus IM only | 182 (89 metastatic, 93 recurrent, 76 underwent surgery) | Clinical response, PFS, OS | 31.5% (early surgery) versus 59.1% (late surgery) | Improved CR, PR, PFS, OS in early surgery group; improved CR, PR, OS in late surgery group |
|
| |||||
| Sato et al. [ | Retrospective cohort comparing IM + surgery to surgery only | 737 (93 recurrent/metastatic—50 surgery + TKI therapy, 43 TKI therapy alone) | DFI, OS | 58% (29 of 50) | Improved survival from surgery + TKI after complete resection, response to TKI, < 4 metastatic lesions, lesions < 100 mm total |
TKI = tyrosine kinase inhibitor, IM = imatinib mesylate, OS = overall survival, DFS = disease-free survival, PFS = progression-free survival, CR = complete response, PR = partial response, RFS = recurrence-free survival, DFI = disease-free interval.