stromal tumor
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

4489
(FIVE YEARS 1058)

H-INDEX

70
(FIVE YEARS 7)

2022 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 376-379
Author(s):  
Mariam Kassimi ◽  
Amal Rami ◽  
Hind Guerroum ◽  
Jihane Habi ◽  
Imane Rahmouni ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 469-476
Author(s):  
Bing Ma ◽  
Xiao-Tian Huang ◽  
Gui-Jun Zou ◽  
Wen-Yu Hou ◽  
Xiao-Hui Du

2022 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Gizem Köroğlu ◽  
Gözde Dağlıöz Görür ◽  
Sevtap Doğan ◽  
Büşra Yaprak Bayrak ◽  
Hakan Demir

2022 ◽  
pp. 112067212110732
Author(s):  
Andrea Montesel ◽  
Chiara M. Eandi ◽  
Leonidas Zografos

Purpose To describe a unique unilateral association between an iris stromal tumor and a macular focal choroidal excavation. Case Description A 40-year old patient presented with a small iris tumor associated with a unilateral macular lesion disclosed during a routine ophthalmologic examination. The patient was asymptomatic and visual function was not affected. After clinical and instrumental evaluation, a diagnosis of nonmelanocytic undefined stromal tumor of the iris associated with macular focal choroidal excavation was made. The size and shape of the two lesions remained stable during a 7-year follow-up and the patient did not develop other signs. Conclusion The concurrent presence of a stromal iris tumor associated with focal choroidal excavation has never been reported. Further reports of this association are required in order to understand its exact pathogenesis.


2022 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingyang Feng ◽  
Yang Yang ◽  
Weiting Liao ◽  
Qiu Li

Background: The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy has dramatically improved the clinical effectiveness of patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and this systematic review was conducted aiming at the cost-effectiveness analysis of TKIs in GIST.Methods: A thorough literature search of online databases was performed, using appropriate terms such as “gastrointestinal stromal tumor or GIST,” “cost-effectiveness,” and “economic evaluation.” Data extraction was conducted independently by two authors, and completeness of reporting and quality of the evaluation were assessed. The systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement.Results: Published between 2005 and 2020, 15 articles were incorporated into the systematic review. For advanced GIST, imatinib followed by sunitinib was considered cost-effective, and regorafenib was cost-effective compared with imatinib re-challenge therapy in the third-line treatment. For resectable GIST, 3-year adjuvant imatinib therapy represented a cost-effective treatment option. The precision medicine-assisted imatinib treatment was cost-effective compared with empirical treatment.Conclusion: Although identified studies varied in predicted costs and quality-adjusted life years, there was general agreement in study conclusions. More cost-effectiveness analysis should be conducted regarding more TKIs that have been approved for the treatment of GIST.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO: CRD42021225253.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document