Comparable long‑term survival outcomes of endoscopic treatment versus surgical treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumors with a diameter of 5–10 cm

Abstract

AbstractCurrently, endoscopic treatment for small gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) has been widely accepted. However, for tumors larger than 5 cm, endoscopic treatment has not been recognized by national guidelines as the standard therapy due to concerns about safety and adverse tumor outcomes. Therefore, this study compares the long-term survival outcomes of endoscopic treatment and surgical treatment for GIST in the range of 5–10 cm. We selected patients with GIST from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2004 and 2015. Kaplan–Meier analysis and the log-rank test were employed to compare the long-term survival outcomes between endoscopic treatment and surgical treatment. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used for analysis to identify risk factors influencing patient prognosis. To balance baseline data, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). A total of 1223 GIST patients were included, with 144 patients (11.8%) received endoscopic treatment and 1079 patients (88.2%) received surgical treatment. Before PSM, there was no significant difference in the long-term survival rates between the two groups [5-year OS (86.5% vs. 83.5%, P = 0.42), 10-year OS (70.4% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.42)]. After adjusting for covariates, we found that the overall survival (HR = 1.26, 95% CI 0.89–1.77, P = 0.19) and cancer-specific survival (HR = 1.69, 95% CI 0.99–2.89, P = 0.053) risks were comparable between the endoscopic treatment group and the surgical treatment group. In the analysis after PSM, there was no significant difference between the endoscopic treatment group and the surgical treatment group. Our study found that for GIST patients with tumor sizes between 5 and 10 cm, the long-term OS and CSS outcomes were similar between the endoscopic treatment group and the surgical treatment group.