Table 2 Reasons for operation following treatment with Imatinib
Patient N | Age at surgery | Tumor location | Best % tumor shrikage | Time to surgery | reason for operation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4 | 43 | Rectum | -47 | 12,1 | Significant response after 12 months on imatinib, enabling tumor resection |
6 | 66 | Mesentery | -63 | 6,7 | Large tumor lesion, decision to operate following tumor shrinkage on imatinib |
7 | 81 | Rectum | -47 | 8,1 | After initial response, patient had early signs of progression (increased blood flow on DCE-ultrasound) and was therefore operated before actual RECIST progression |
8 | 40 | Rectum | -46 | 7,3 | Surgery enabled following tumor shrinkage |
12 | 43 | Small bowel | -74 | 6,5 | Surgery planned prior to treatment with imatinib (true neoadjuvant) |
13 | 61 | Small bowel | -74 | 11,7 | Surgery enabled following tumor shrinkage |
14 | 71 | Small bowel | 20 | 3,4 | Rapid progression on imatinib 400 mg/d, dose increased to 600 mg/d which was poorly tolerated, salvage surgery seemed feasible. Resection was R1 |
15 | 76 | Stomach | 5 | 4,4 | No response on imatinib with poor tolerance. Following surgery this patient was restarted on a lower dose of IM. |
16 | 50 | Small bowel | -19 | 7,3 | Stable disease after 6 months on imatinib, surgery was deemed feasible by surgeon. |