Application of ultrasonography in predicting the biological risk of gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Abstract

Objectives

To explore and establish a reliable and noninvasive ultrasound model for predicting the biological risk of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed 266 patients with pathologically-confirmed GISTs and 191 patients were included. Data on patient sex, age, tumor location, biological risk classification, internal echo, echo homogeneity, boundary, shape, blood flow signals, presence of necrotic cystic degeneration, long diameter, and short/long (S/L) diameter ratio were collected. All patients were divided into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups according to the modified NIH classification criteria. All indicators were analyzed by univariate analysis. The indicators with inter-group differences were used to establish regression and decision tree models to predict the biological risk of GISTs.

Results

There were statistically significant differences in long diameter, S/L ratio, internal echo level, echo homogeneity, boundary, shape, necrotic cystic degeneration, and blood flow signals among the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups (all p < .05). The logistic regression model based on the echo homogeneity, shape, necrotic cystic degeneration and blood flow signals had an accuracy rate of 76.96% for predicting the biological risk, which was higher than the 72.77% of the decision tree model (based on the long diameter, the location of tumor origin, echo homogeneity, shape, and internal echo) (p = .008). In the low-risk and high-risk groups, the predicting accuracy rates of the regression model reached 87.34 and 81.82%, respectively.

Conclusions

Transabdominal ultrasound is highly valuable in predicting the biological risk of GISTs. The logistic regression model has greater predictive value than the decision tree model.

Keywords:

• Gastrointestinal stromal tumors
• biological risk
• regression analysis
• ultrasonography
• decision tree model

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Author contributions

Conceptualization: Zhi-Kui Chen. Data curation: Jing-Jing Guo, Xiu-Bin Tang, and Qing-Fu Qian. Formal analysis: Jing-Jing Guo and Min-Lin Zhuo. Investigation: Jing-Jing Guo and Xiu-Bin Tang. Supervision: Zhi-Kui Chen and Li-Wu Lin. Writing—original draft: Jing-Jing Guo. Writing—review & editing: Zhi-Kui Chen and En-Sheng Xue.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the 5th Round Joint Research Project from the Health and Family Planning commission and Education Department of Fujian Province of China under Grant [2019-WJ-06]