胃肠道外与十二指肠胃肠间质瘤的临床特征及预后的分析比较

Analysis and comparison of the clinical features and prognosis between extra - gastrointestinal stromal tumors and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors

目的分析比较胃肠道外胃肠间质瘤(EGIST)与十二指肠胃肠间质瘤(DGIST)的临床病理特征和预后的差异。方法采用回顾性病例对照的研究方法。病例入组标准:(1)组织学和病理学诊断为间叶源性肿瘤;(2)原发肿瘤位于胃肠道以外且无原发GIST存在的证据或者原发肿瘤位于十二指肠;(3)不合并其他肿瘤;(4)临床病理资料齐全。收集2011年3月到2016年9月间上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院胃肠外科诊治的20例EGIST和32例DGIST患者的临床资料。观察指标包括两组患者的临床病理特征、治疗情况和预后情况。非正态分布的计量资料用M(范围)表示,组间比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。Kaplan-Meier法绘制生存曲线,用Log-rank检验进行生存分析。结果20例EGIST患者中男8例、女12例,年龄61.0(30.0~86.0)岁;32例DGIST患者中男12例、女20例,年龄55.5(27.0~70.0)岁;两组比较,EGIST组年龄更大,差异有统计学意义(U=188.000,P=0.012)。EGIST组患者与DGIST组患者比较,肿瘤最大径更长[10.0(3.0~29.0)cm比4.0(1.5~10.0)cm,U=98.500,P<0.001]、风险分级为高危者比例更高[17/20比12.5%(4/32),χ^2=26.870,P<0.001]。EGIST组者中诊断时已有远处转移的5例患者均给予伊马替尼400 mg/d治疗,其余15例患者行根治性切除术;DGIST的32例患者均接受根治性切除术。全组中位随访43(14~76)个月。接受根治性手术的15例EGIST患者术后3年无复发转移生存率为85.6%,低于DGIST患者的88.6%,但差异无统计学意义(P=0.745)。EGIST患者术后3年总体生存率为92.9%,DGIST患者为100%,差异无统计学意义(P=0.271)。结论EGIST与DGIST相比,患者年龄更大、肿瘤更大以及风险分级更高;但接受根治性手术切除的预后相当。

Objective To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods A retrospective case - control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria:(1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology;(2) primary tumor locating in the extra - gastrointestinal tract or duodenum;(3) without other synchronous tumors;(4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the Log-rank test. Results Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0%(17/20) vs. 12.5%(4/32),χ2=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow-up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3-year recurrence/metastasis-free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%)(P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.