BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The anatomical extent of nodal metastasis has been replaced by the number of metastatic nodes as a key indicator of prognosis (pN categories) in the fifth edition of Tumor Node Metastasis Classification for gastric carcinoma by the International Union Against Cancer. The rate of metastatic nodes among all the nodes harvested is also a good prognostic factor. The object of this study is to evaluate which of the three parameters for the assessment of nodal status is the most appropriate for use in the stage classification. METHODS: Retrospective survival analyses were performed in 656 consecutive patients with advanced gastric carcinoma who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy and for whom histopathologic data of more than 20 lymph nodes were available. RESULTS: Although all three systems served well to classify the patients into distinct groups in terms of survival curves, stratification by the number of metastatic nodes was vulnerable to stage migration because of differences in the number of lymph nodes harvested. Such stage migration was not evident for the other two parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node metastatic rate can be recommended as an internationally applicable parameter for lymph node involvement of gastric carcinoma.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The anatomical extent of nodal metastasis has been replaced by the number of metastatic nodes as a key indicator of prognosis (pN categories) in the fifth edition of Tumor Node Metastasis Classification for gastric carcinoma by the International Union Against Cancer. The rate of metastatic nodes among all the nodes harvested is also a good prognostic factor. The object of this study is to evaluate which of the three parameters for the assessment of nodal status is the most appropriate for use in the stage classification. METHODS: Retrospective survival analyses were performed in 656 consecutive patients with advanced gastric carcinoma who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy and for whom histopathologic data of more than 20 lymph nodes were available. RESULTS: Although all three systems served well to classify the patients into distinct groups in terms of survival curves, stratification by the number of metastatic nodes was vulnerable to stage migration because of differences in the number of lymph nodes harvested. Such stage migration was not evident for the other two parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node metastatic rate can be recommended as an internationally applicable parameter for lymph node involvement of gastric carcinoma.