Lymphomas of the Gut

Weingrad, Daniel N.; Cosse, Jerome J. De; Sherlock, Paul; Straus, David J.; Lieberman, Philip

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-8255-0_12

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Annular infiltrations of variable length, sometimes associated with small nodules protruding in the lumen, lead to intestinal obstruction. Composite gross patterns may be observed [31] (fig. 1).…”

Section: Gross Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In all series, the initial extent of the dis ease is also a significant determinant of PDTL outcome [58], According to the Ann Arbor Staging System modified by Musshoff [59], stage IE (disease localized to the gut wall) and II iE (involvement of primary drain ing nodal groups only) have a significantly better prognosis (5-year survival of 0.50) than stage II2E (extension to more distant subdiaphragmatic lymph nodes), 11IE (in volvement of lymph nodes on both sides of the diaphragm) and IV (disseminated dis ease), which share a very poor outcome (5-year survival of 0-0.30) [2,31,57,59], Other anatomical parameters are also of impor tance. Large tumors, which often invade ad jacent tissues and thus cannot be resected surgically, have a poor survival [22,57].…”

Section: Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Large tumors, which often invade ad jacent tissues and thus cannot be resected surgically, have a poor survival [22,57]. Per foration with peritonitis or internal fistulae are also high risk factors, whereas the signifi cance of multiple or multiorgan localization is debated [22,31].…”

Section: Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent prospective series of PDTL, patients with unresected tumors had a very poor outcome [57], Thus, the authors, as Weingradct al. [31], recommended radical surgery whenever possible, even if atypical or extensive resection was necessary. However it may be advocated that unresectability of the tumor is merely evidence of the poor prognosis of large bulky lesions.…”

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Small Intestinal Lymphomas

Rambaud¹,

Ruskoné²

1985

Dig Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Gross Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coursementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Small Intestinal Lymphomas

Rambaud¹,

Ruskoné²

1985

Dig Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prognostic factors in primary gastrointestinal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. A multivariate analysis, report of 106 cases, and review of the literature

Azab

Henry‐Amar

Rougier

et al. 1989

Cancer

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors have reviewed 106 cases of primary gastrointestinal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (GI-NHL) treated at the Institut Gustave-Roussy (IGR), France, between 1975 and 1986. The occurrence was 55 in the stomach, 26 in the small intestine, ten ileocecal, seven in the large intestine, and eight patients had multiple involvement. Patients were clinically staged according to the Ann Arbor staging system using the modification of Musshoff for Stage IIE. All histologic material of the 106 patients were reviewed and graded according to the Working Formulation (WF) and the Kiel classifications. Most patients received combination chemotherapy as part or all of their primary treatment program (95 patients, 90%). Seventy five patients (71%) had a multimodality treatment. The overall 5-year survival rate was 60%. Sixteen variables were tested by univariate analyses for prognostic influence on survival. Of these, only clinical stage (P less than 0.001), the achievement of initial complete remission (CR) (P less than 0.001), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (P = 0.01), mesenteric involvement (P = 0.03), and serosal infiltration (P = 0.05) were significant prognostic factors. Important variables were tested by a multivariate analysis using the Cox model taking into account different treatment modalities. Only three variables entered the regression analysis at a significant level: clinical stage (P = 0.02), surgical resection (P = 0.03), and histologic grade (Kiel) (P = 0.04). When the achievement of initial CR was introduced into the model, it was the most significant variable (P less than 0.001) whereas all other variables became nonsignificant except for the histologic grade (Kiel) (P = 0.004). Based on results of the multivariate analyses we propose two prognostic classifications of patients: one at the initial evaluation depending on clinical stage, surgical resectability, and histologic grade (Kiel); the other at the end of primary treatment depending on the achievement or not of CR and the histologic grade.

show abstract

Clinical Aspects of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma of the Gastrointestinal Tract

Tjen

Pegels

1988

Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lymphomas of the Gut

Cited by 3 publications

References 119 publications

Small Intestinal Lymphomas

Small Intestinal Lymphomas

Prognostic factors in primary gastrointestinal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. A multivariate analysis, report of 106 cases, and review of the literature

Clinical Aspects of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma of the Gastrointestinal Tract

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About