Effect of Lymph Node Number on Survival of Patients with Lymph Node-Negative Gastric Cancer according to the 7th Edition UICC TNM System

Abstract

Background

For the patients with node-negative gastric cancer, the 7th edition classification does not define the minimum number of lymph nodes necessary. We aimed to explore the prognostic significance of examined lymph nodes and determine how many nodes must be examined.

Methodology/Principal Findings

435 patients underwent D2 gastrectomy with node-negative gastric cancer between December 1992 and December 2006 were obtained. Patients were classified into 4 groups by the number of negative LNs examined during surgery (1-6LNs, 7-10 LNs, 11-15 LNs, and > = 16 LNs). Stratified and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between survival and the number of negative LNs. Survival was significantly better in the > = 16 LNs, compared with the 1-5 LNs, 6-10 LNs and 11-15 LNs group in T2-4 patients; Multivariate analysis demonstrated tumor size, depth of invasion, 7th UICC stage and the number of examined nodes are strongly independent predictors of survival.

Conclusions

This study first demonstrates that patients with lymph node-negative gastric cancer underwent D2 dissection should have at least 16 LNs examined, especially in advanced gastric cancer. These results are a reasonable supplement to our previous tumor-ratio-metastasis staging system and a stratification criterion in clinical pratice.

About the Authors:

Dazhi Xu

Contributed equally to this work with: Dazhi Xu, Ying Huang

* E-mail: [email protected] (YZ); [email protected] (DX)

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Ying Huang

Contributed equally to this work with: Dazhi Xu, Ying Huang

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Radiotherapy, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Qirong Geng

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Hematology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Yuanxiang Guan

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Yuanfang Li

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Wei Wang

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Shuqiang Yuan

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Xiaowei Sun

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Yingbo Chen

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Wei Li

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Zhiwei Zhou

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Youqing Zhan

* E-mail: [email protected] (YZ); [email protected] (DX)

Affiliations State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China, Department of Gastric and Pancreatic Surgery, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Introduction

Gastric cancer is the fourth most common cancer worldwide [1]. The prognosis of gastric cancer patients remains poor, with a 5-year overall survival of 25% or less, especially in the USA, Europe, and China [2], [3]. Lymph node metastasis is an important prognostic indicator for the patients with gastric cancer. It is widely accepted that a higher survival rate benefits from a standardized pattern of lymph node dissection [4], [5], [6]. In 2010, the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) proposed the seventh edition of the UICC TNM classification with a substantial change in the staging of gastric cancer. Currently, the new classification is used most widely for the staging of gastric cancer [7]. But it does not define the minimum number of lymph nodes (LNs) necessary, especially for the gastric cancer patients stage pN0.

Although approximately 15% of the patients with node-negative disease still go on to die of disease [8], few studies have assessed the optimal examined number of LNs in patients with lymph node-negative gastric cancers according to the 7th UICC TNM System. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the long-term effect of the number of examined lymph nodes (LNs) on the prognosis of patients. We further explore the optimal number of LNs for accurate staging in the patients with node-negative gastric cancer after D2 dissection.

Materials and Methods

Patient Characteristics

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 1. Distribution of the number of lymphy nodes examined for the entire cohort of 435 patients.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.g001

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 2. Overall survival curves for 4 categories of patients according to the number of the lymph nodes (LNs) examined in 435 patients (P = 0.0001).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.g002

A total of 1551 gastric carcinoma patients undergone D2 gastrectomy at Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University between December 1992 and December 2006 were selected. The eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed R0 resection, which was defined as no macroscopic and microscopic residual tumor and postoperative survival time ≥6 months. Patients who received chemotherapy or radiotherapy before surgery and patients with carcinoma of gastric stump were excluded from the study. D2 lymphadenectomy were performed by experienced surgeons following the Japanese Research Society for Gastric Cancer (JRSGC) guidelines [9]. At last, a total of 435 patients were enrolled in this study. We obtained informed consent from all participants involved in this study. Ethical approval was obtained from Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center research ethics committee.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 1. Distribution of clinicopathologic characteristics for four categories by the number of examined lymph nodes.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.t001

The median age of the cohort was 56 years (range, 16–83 years), and included 293 males and 142 females. All nodal material was separately dissected from the specimen at the end of the procedure by the surgeon. Each lymph node was submitted in separate pots labelled according to their site of origin, then measured in three dimensions and analyzed by the pathologist. For all the LNs, one section was routinely examined histopathologically. Sometimes serial sections were also cut from node area with the aim of the definited diagnosis and staging. Using the best cut-off approach in terms of the log-rank test, we classified the patients into four categories: 1-6 LNs, 7-10 LNs, 11-15 LNs and > = 16 LNs.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 3. Gastric cancer-specific survival was found to be significantly higher among patients with >16 negative LNs compared with those with <16 LNs.

(A) Gastric cancer-specific survival curves in pathological T2 patients according to the number of negative lymph nodes (LNs) (P = 0.040). (B) Gastric cancer-specific survival curves in pathological T3 patients according to the number of negative lymph nodes (LNs) (P = 0.007). (C) Gastric cancer-specific survival curves in pathological T4 patients according to the number of negative lymph nodes. (P<0.001).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.g003

Follow-up

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 2. Univariate analysis of variables in patients with node-negative gastric cancer.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.t002

In general, all patients had follow-up after surgery every 3 months for the first year, every 6 months for the second year, and twice a year thereafter. The routine examination during follow-up included a physical examination, blood chemistry, X-ray of the chest, ultrasound of the liver and abdomen, bone scan and endoscopy. If the patient had specific symptoms, the examination was performed as soon as possible for a more careful assessment. The follow-up period ranged from the first day of therapy until death or until the last examination visit. The median follow-up period in our study was 72 months (range 6–197 months). We used disease-specific mortality for evaluating the association between the number of negative LNs and gastric cancer prognosis because it allows for controlling for unrelated causes of death [10]. The survival time was the time from diagnosis until the last contact, the date of death, or the date that the survival information was collected.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 3. Independent prognosic factor for cancer-specific survival by multivariate Cox regression analysis for the entire cohort of patients (n = 435).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681.t003

Statistical Methods

Survival analysis and curves were generated from observed postoperative survival times according to the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Multivariate analyses were carried out by the Cox proportional hazard model by the forward stepwise procedure for variable selection. Multivariate P values were used to characterize the independence of these factors. The 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to quantify the relationship between survival time and each independent factor. Differences were considered to be significant at the 5% level. All analyses were performed by SPSS for Windows, version 18.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to analyze the relationship between the number of examined LNs and recurrence rate. The correlation between the number of examined LNs and post-operative complication rate was analyzed with logistic regression model. Significance of differences was assumed at P<0.05.

Results

Patient Characteristics

A total of 435 cases fit the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. According to Martingale residuals of the Cox model, the cut-off points of the number of examined LNs was identified as 1–5, 6–10,11–15 and > = 16 LNs. Table 1 gives the characteristics of patients and their tumors according to the number of examined lymph nodes. Tumor location and depth of invasion had a significant influence on the number of examined lymph nodes. There were no significant differences between the distribution of gender, age, tumor size or 7th UICC stage and the 4 different categories according to the number of negative LNs.

Number of Examined LNs and Survival

Fig. 1 shows the frequency distribution of examined LNs for the entire cohort of patients. The mean ± standard deviation number of pathologically examined LNs for the entire cohort of 435 patients was 13.5±4.5, ranging from 1 to 53 (median 12). As shown in Fig. 2, cancer-specific survival was significantly higher with an increasing number of negative LNs. The 5-year gastric cancer-specific survival rate was 65.7% for patients with 1 to 6 negative LNs compared with 70.1%, 79% and 91.2% for those with 7 to 10, 11 to 15 and more than16 LNs examined, respectively (P<.001).

Identification of Optimal LN Number

Table 2 shows univariate survival analysis of variables in patients with node-negative gastric cancer. It revealed that tumor size, tumor location, depth of invasion, number of examined LNs, 7th UICC stage are associated with gastric cancer-specific survival.

Subgroup analysis was then conducted to evaluate the survival of the patients in different pathologic T categories. For patients with T2 tumors, the gastric cancer-specific survival difference was statistically significant between (<16 vs > = 16 negative LNs) (Fig. 3A). Simiarly, among T3 or T4 cases, patients with > = 16 negative LNs had the best disease-specific survival rates (Fig. 3B and 3C). The gastric cancer-specific survival in the patients with T1 tumors has no statistically difference. (data not shown).

Survival Analysis

To identify whether the number of negative LNs was associated with survival, a multivariate logistic regression model was then applied (Table 3). The results demonstrated that: tumor size, depth of invasion, 7th UICC stage and the number of examined nodes is strong independent predictors of survival. Compared to the patients who had fewer than 6 examined nodes, patients with 6–10,11–15 and > = 16 LNs examined had a significantly lower chance of death during their gastrectomy.

Discussion

Previously, we found that positive lymph node ratio (LNR) is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer after D2 resection regardless of the number of retrieved lymph nodes [11]. Furthermore, we demonstrated tumor-ratio-metastasis (TRM) staging system is an alternative to the 7th edition UICC TNM system in gastric cancer after D2 resection [12]. These results make it possible that a staging system based on the TRM could substitute for the current UICC classification, especially when the examined number of lymph nodes is not enough. However, it is difficult to evaluate the prognosis of patients by TRM for lymph node-negative gastric cancer [13].

In present study, all the node-negative gastric cancer patients underwent D2 resection, which is widely performed as a standard surgical procedure for gastric cancer in Asian countries. In order to assess the effect of the number of negative LNs on gastric cancer prognosis, disease-specific survival is used in our analyses to control for unrelated causes of death. The findings showed that the patients have a better disease-specific survival rate with increasing number of examined negative LNs. There were several potential reasons for that. First, some patients pathologically negative nodes in fact may have had cancer disseminated to regional LNs. Although all the patients underwent D2 dissection, the pathologists and surgeons vary in efforts and techniques in searching for lymph nodes, which could lead to omitted nodes in the specimen [14], [15]. As the number of LNs examined increases, the probability of missing a positive LN decreases and so does the proportion of patients with higher-stage disease who are misclassified as lower-stage. A low LNs examined results in an underestimation of stage, which is known as the Will Rogers phenomenon [10], [16]. Second, the contribution of negative node number to the prognosis of patients is partly due to considerably high rate LN micrometastases [17]. In node-negative patients identified by routine histologic examination, about 17%–32% had LN micrometastases [18], [19]. The patients with micrometastases often have an especially high risk for recurrence [20].

In current study, our data remarked depth of invasion and the number of examined nodes is strong independent predictors of survival in multivariate logistic regression model, which is similar to other studies [8], [20]. Moreover, the number of examined lymph nodes is associated with depth of invasion (T stage). Therefore, we analyzed the survival differences between groups according to different T stage. Compared to the patients who had fewer than 6 examined nodes, patients with 6–10,11–15 and > = 16 LNs removed had a significantly lower chance of death in patients with T2–4 disease. These patients are also defined as advanced gastric cancer, which constitutes the majority of gastric patients in clinical practice [21].

As for T1 stage gastric cancers in present study, the number of T1 cases is small and the 5-year survival rate is up to 97%, thus the gastric cancer-specific survival among them has no statistically difference. Additionally, the alternative explanation for this may be that patients with T1 classification seldom spread to regional LNs. The incidence of node metastasis in T1 patients about is only 15%–20% [22], [23]. However, it is difficult to determine depth of invasion and lymph node metastasis before surgery. Therefore, our data strongly suggest that at least 16 LNs should be removed during D2 resection.

Recently, several articles have evaluated prognostic value of lymph node number in lymph node-negative gastric cancer patients. Bouvier showed that at least 10 lymph nodes must be examined in order to accurately stage gastric carcinoma in node-negative cancers [24]. However, in their studies, most patients consisted underwent D1 resection, different from the current patients with only D2 resection. In the past, as some trials failed to demonstrate a survival benefit of D2 over D1 dissection, D1 lymphadendctomy resection was always performed in the Western countries [25], [26]. Whereas oriental surgeons do not accept the results and routinely perform D2 gastrectomy [27]. In fact, with the release of the latest clinical trial results, D2 lymphadenectomy is gradually becoming the recommended surgical approach for patients with resectable gastric cancer [28]. Baiocchi et al. also assessed 301 lymph node-negative gastric carcinoma patients with D2 resection [20]. They identified retrieval of more than 25 nodes may be warranted. Compared with our results, their selected were the patients with more than 15 nodes pathologically analyzed. However, many population-based studies of gastric cancer have found that surgeons and pathologists failed to accomplish more than 15 nodes [29], [30], [31]. Therefore, it is very important and meaningful to evaluate prognostic value less than 15 nodes of in lymph node-negative gastric cancer.

In addition, none of the above studies described the method of selecting of the reported cut-offs among the above studies. In this study, we examined the functional form of the covariate under study by Martingale residual analysis and identified the cutoff points of the number of examined LNs as 1-6 LNs, 7-10 LNs, 11-15 LNs, and > = 16 LNs [32], [33]. We believe the method can discriminate the survival differences between groups and make our study objectively valid [34], [35], [36].

In conclusion, the current study first demonstrates that patients with lymph node-negative gastric cancer following D2 dissection should have at least 16 LNs examined, especially in advanced gastric cancer. It should be used as a reasonable supplement to our TRM staging system and a stratification criterion in clinical pratice according to the 7th Edition UICC TNM System.

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: DX YZ. Performed the experiments: YH QG. Analyzed the data: YH QG. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: YG WW SY YL YC XS WL ZZ. Wrote the paper: DX YH QG.

Citation: Xu D, Huang Y, Geng Q, Guan Y, Li Y, Wang W, et al. (2012) Effect of Lymph Node Number on Survival of Patients with Lymph Node-Negative Gastric Cancer according to the 7th Edition UICC TNM System. PLoS ONE7(6): e38681. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038681

References

1. Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF (2006) Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities indifferent geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol 24: 2137–2150.F. KamangarGM DoresWF Anderson2006Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities indifferent geographic regions of the world.J Clin Oncol2421372150

2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J (2008) Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58: 71–96.A. JemalR. SiegelE. WardY. HaoJ. Xu2008Cancer statistics, 2008.CA Cancer J Clin587196

3. Hartgrink HH, Jansen EP, van Grieken NC, van de Velde CJ (2009) Gastric cancer. Lancet 374: 477–490.HH HartgrinkEP JansenNC van GriekenCJ van de Velde2009Gastric cancer.Lancet374477490

4. Kim JP, Lee JH, Kim SJ, Yu HJ, Yang HK (1998) Clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic factors in 10783 patients with gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 1: 125–133.JP KimJH LeeSJ KimHJ YuHK Yang1998Clinicopathologic characteristics and prognostic factors in 10783 patients with gastric cancer.Gastric Cancer1125133

5. Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, Bancewicz J, Craven J (1999) Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group. Br J Cancer 79: 1522–1530.A. CuschieriS. WeedenJ. FieldingJ. BancewiczJ. Craven1999Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group.Br J Cancer7915221530

6. Kasakura Y, Mochizuki F, Wakabayashi K, Kochi M, Fujii M (2002) An evaluation of the effectiveness of extended lymph node dissection in patients with gastric cancer: a retrospective study of 1403 cases at a single institution. J Surg Res 2002 103: 252–259.Y. KasakuraF. MochizukiK. WakabayashiM. KochiM. Fujii2002An evaluation of the effectiveness of extended lymph node dissection in patients with gastric cancer: a retrospective study of 1403 cases at a single institution.J Surg Res 2002103252259

7. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2010) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 7th edition. 455 p. LH SobinMK GospodarowiczC. Wittekind2010TNM classification of malignant tumours, 7th edition.455 p

8. Saito H, Kuroda H, Matsunaga T, Fukuda K, Tatebe S (2010) Prognostic indicators in node-negative advanced gastric cancer patients. J Surg Oncol 101: 622–625.H. SaitoH. KurodaT. MatsunagaK. FukudaS. Tatebe2010Prognostic indicators in node-negative advanced gastric cancer patients.J Surg Oncol101622625

9. Kajitani T (1981) The general rules for the gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology: part I. Clinical classification. Jpn J Surg 11: 127–139.T. Kajitani1981The general rules for the gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology: part I. Clinical classification.Jpn J Surg11127139

10. Greenstein AJ, Litle VR, Swanson SJ, Divino CM, Packer S (2008) Effect of the number of lymph nodes sampled on postoperative survival of lymph node-negative esophageal cancer. Cancer 112: 1239–1246.AJ GreensteinVR LitleSJ SwansonCM DivinoS. Packer2008Effect of the number of lymph nodes sampled on postoperative survival of lymph node-negative esophageal cancer.Cancer11212391246

11. Xu DZ, Geng QR, Long ZJ, Zhan YQ, Li W (2009) Positive lymph node ratio is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer after D2 resection regardless of the examined number of lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol 16: 319–326.DZ XuQR GengZJ LongYQ ZhanW. Li2009Positive lymph node ratio is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer after D2 resection regardless of the examined number of lymph nodes.Ann Surg Oncol16319326

12. Wang W, Xu DZ, Li YF, Guan YX, Sun XW (2011) Tumor-ratio-metastasis staging system as an alternative to the 7th edition UICC TNM system in gastric cancer after D2 resection–results of a single-institution study of 1343 Chinese patients. Ann Oncol 22: 2049–2056.W. WangDZ XuYF LiYX GuanXW Sun2011Tumor-ratio-metastasis staging system as an alternative to the 7th edition UICC TNM system in gastric cancer after D2 resection–results of a single-institution study of 1343 Chinese patients.Ann Oncol2220492056

13. Xu DZ (2010) The lymph node ratio staging system in gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17: 659.DZ Xu2010The lymph node ratio staging system in gastric cancer.Ann Surg Oncol17659

14. Noda N, Sasako M, Yamaguchi N, Nakanishi Y (1998) Ignoring small lymph nodes can be a major cause of staging error in gastric cancer. Br J Surg 85: 831–834.N. NodaM. SasakoN. YamaguchiY. Nakanishi1998Ignoring small lymph nodes can be a major cause of staging error in gastric cancer.Br J Surg85831834

15. Wong SL, Ji H, Hollenbeck BK, Morris AM, Baser O (2007) Hospital lymph node examination rates and survival after resection for colon cancer. JAMA 298: 2149–2154.SL WongH. JiBK HollenbeckAM MorrisO. Baser2007Hospital lymph node examination rates and survival after resection for colon cancer.JAMA29821492154

16. Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK (1985) The Will Rogers phenomenon. Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 312: 1604–8.AR FeinsteinDM SosinCK Wells1985The Will Rogers phenomenon. Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer.N Engl J Med31216048

17. Wu ZY, Li JH, Zhan WH, He YL, Wan J (2007) Effect of lymph node micrometastases on prognosis of gastric carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 13: 4122–4125.ZY WuJH LiWH ZhanYL HeJ. Wan2007Effect of lymph node micrometastases on prognosis of gastric carcinoma.World J Gastroenterol1341224125

18. Kim JH, Park JM, Jung CW, Park SS, Kim SJ (2008) The significances of lymph node micrometastasis and its correlation with E-cadherin expression in pT1–T3N0 gastric adenocarcinoma. J Surg Oncol 97: 125–130.JH KimJM ParkCW JungSS ParkSJ Kim2008The significances of lymph node micrometastasis and its correlation with E-cadherin expression in pT1–T3N0 gastric adenocarcinoma.J Surg Oncol97125130

19. Yasuda K, Adachi Y, Shiraishi N, Inomata M, Takeuchi H (2002) Prognostic effect of lymph node micrometastasis in patients with histologically node-negative gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 9: 771–774.K. YasudaY. AdachiN. ShiraishiM. InomataH. Takeuchi2002Prognostic effect of lymph node micrometastasis in patients with histologically node-negative gastric cancer.Ann Surg Oncol9771774

20. Baiocchi GL, Tiberio GA, Minicozzi AM, Morgagni P, Marrelli D (2010) A multicentric Western analysis of prognostic factors in advanced, node-negative gastric cancer patients. Ann Surg 252: 70–73.GL BaiocchiGA TiberioAM MinicozziP. MorgagniD. Marrelli2010A multicentric Western analysis of prognostic factors in advanced, node-negative gastric cancer patients.Ann Surg2527073

21. Siewert JR (2005) Gastric cancer: the dispute between East and West. Gastric Cancer 8: 59–61.JR Siewert2005Gastric cancer: the dispute between East and West.Gastric Cancer85961

22. Roviello F, Rossi S, Marrelli D, Pedrazzani C, Corso G (2006) Number of lymph node metastases and its prognostic significance in early gastric cancer: a multicenter Italian study. J Surg Oncol 94: 275–280.F. RovielloS. RossiD. MarrelliC. PedrazzaniG. Corso2006Number of lymph node metastases and its prognostic significance in early gastric cancer: a multicenter Italian study.J Surg Oncol94275280

23. Namikawa T, Kitagawa H, Iwabu J, Okabayashi T, Sugimoto T (2010) Clinicopathological properties of the superficial spreading type early gastric cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 14: 52–57.T. NamikawaH. KitagawaJ. IwabuT. OkabayashiT. Sugimoto2010Clinicopathological properties of the superficial spreading type early gastric cancer.J Gastrointest Surg145257

24. Bouvier AM, Haas O, Piard F, Roignot P, Bonithon-Kopp C (2002) How Many Nodes Must Be Examined to Accurately Stage Gastric Carcinomas? Results from a population based study. Cancer 94: 2862–2866.AM BouvierO. HaasF. PiardP. RoignotC. Bonithon-Kopp2002How Many Nodes Must Be Examined to Accurately Stage Gastric Carcinomas? Results from a population based study.Cancer9428622866

25. Hartgrink HH, van de Velde CJ, Putter H, Bonenkamp JJ, Klein Kranenbarg E (2004) Extended lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: who may benefit? Final results of the randomized Dutch gastric cancer group trial. J Clin Oncol 22: 2069–2077.HH HartgrinkCJ van de VeldeH. PutterJJ BonenkampE. Klein Kranenbarg2004Extended lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: who may benefit? Final results of the randomized Dutch gastric cancer group trial.J Clin Oncol2220692077

26. Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, Bancewicz J, Craven J (1999) Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group. Br J Cancer 79: 1522–1530.A. CuschieriS. WeedenJ. FieldingJ. BancewiczJ. Craven1999Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group.Br J Cancer7915221530

27. Ohtsu A, Yoshida S, Saijo N (2006) Disparities in gastric cancer chemotherapy between the East and West. J Clin Oncol 24: 2188–2196.A. OhtsuS. YoshidaN. Saijo2006Disparities in gastric cancer chemotherapy between the East and West.J Clin Oncol2421882196

28. Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ (2010) Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol 11: 439–449.I. SongunH. PutterEM KranenbargM. SasakoCJ van de Velde2010Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial.Lancet Oncol11439449

29. Kooby DA, Suriawinata A, Klimstra DS, Brennan MF, Karpeh MS (2003) Biologic predictors of survival in node-negative gastric cancer. Ann Surg 237: 828–835.DA KoobyA. SuriawinataDS KlimstraMF BrennanMS Karpeh2003Biologic predictors of survival in node-negative gastric cancer.Ann Surg237828835

30. MacDonald JS, Smalley SR, Benedetti J, Hundahl SA, Estes NC (2001) Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. N Engl J Med 345: 725–730.JS MacDonaldSR SmalleyJ. BenedettiSA HundahlNC Estes2001Chemoradiotherapy after surgery compared with surgery alone for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction.N Engl J Med345725730

31. Estes NC, MacDonald JS, Touijer K, Benedetti J, Jacobson J (1998) Inadequate documentation and resection for gastric cancer in the United States: a preliminary report. Am Surg 64: 680–685.NC EstesJS MacDonaldK. TouijerJ. BenedettiJ. Jacobson1998Inadequate documentation and resection for gastric cancer in the United States: a preliminary report.Am Surg64680685

32. Therneau TM, Grambsh PM, Flemming TR (1990) Martingale based residuals for survival models. Biometrika 77: 147–160.TM TherneauPM GrambshTR Flemming1990Martingale based residuals for survival models.Biometrika77147160

33. Yang HX, Xu Y, Fu JH, Wang JY, Lin P (2010) An evaluation of the number of lymph nodes examined and survival for node-negative esophageal carcinoma: data from China. Ann Surg Oncol 17: 1901–1911.HX YangY. XuJH FuJY WangP. Lin2010An evaluation of the number of lymph nodes examined and survival for node-negative esophageal carcinoma: data from China.Ann Surg Oncol1719011911

34. Grambsch PM, Therneau TM, Fleming TR (1995) Diagnostic plots to reveal functional form for covariates in multiplicative intensity models. Biometrics 51: 1469–1482.PM GrambschTM TherneauTR Fleming1995Diagnostic plots to reveal functional form for covariates in multiplicative intensity models.Biometrics5114691482

35. Wijnhoven BP, Tran KT, Esterman A, Watson DI, Tilanus HW (2007) An evaluation of prognostic factors and tumor staging of resected carcinoma of the esophagus. Ann Surg 245: 717–725.BP WijnhovenKT TranA. EstermanDI WatsonHW Tilanus2007An evaluation of prognostic factors and tumor staging of resected carcinoma of the esophagus.Ann Surg245717725

36. Huang B, Zheng X, Wang Z, Wang M, Dong Y (2009) Prognostic significance of the number of metastatic lymph nodes: is UICC/TNM node classification perfectly suitable for early gastric cancer? Ann Surg Oncol 16: 61–67.B. HuangX. ZhengZ. WangM. WangY. Dong2009Prognostic significance of the number of metastatic lymph nodes: is UICC/TNM node classification perfectly suitable for early gastric cancer?Ann Surg Oncol166167