International comparison of treatment strategy and survival in metastatic gastric cancer.

Background: In the randomized Asian REGATTA trial, no survival benefit was shown for additional gastrectomy over chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer with a single incurable factor, thereby discouraging surgery for these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate treatment strategies for patients with metastatic gastric cancer in daily practice in five European countries, along with relative survival in each country. Methods: Nationwide population-based data from Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden were combined. Patients with primary metastatic gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2014 were included. The proportion of gastric resections performed and the administration of chemotherapy (irrespective of surgery) within each country were determined. Relative survival according to country was calculated. Results: Overall, 15 057 patients with gastric cancer were included. The proportion of gastric resections varied from 8·1 per cent in the Netherlands and Denmark to 18·3 per cent in Belgium. Administration of chemotherapy was 39·2 per cent in the Netherlands, compared with 63·2 per cent in Belgium. The 6-month relative survival rate was between 39·0 (95 per cent c.i. 37·8 to 40·2) per cent in the Netherlands and 54·1 (52·1 to 56·9) per cent in Belgium. Conclusion: There is variation in the use of gastrectomy and chemotherapy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, and subsequent differences in survival.

International benchmarking in oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery.

Background: Benchmarking on an international level might lead to improved outcomes at a national level. The aim of this study was to compare treatment and surgical outcome data from the Swedish National Register for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer (NREV) and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). Methods: All patients with primary oesophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a resection and were registered in NREV or DUCA between 2012 and 2014 were included. Differences in 30-day mortality were analysed using case mix-adjusted multivariable logistic regression. Results: In total, 4439 patients underwent oesophagectomy (2509 patients) or gastrectomy (1930 patients). Estimated resection rates were comparable. Swedish patients were older but had less advanced disease and less co-morbidity than Dutch patients. Neoadjuvant treatment rates were lower in Sweden than in the Netherlands, both for patients who underwent oesophagectomy (68·6 versus 90·0 per cent respectively; P < 0·001) and for those having gastrectomy (38·3 versus 56·6 per cent; P < 0·001). In Sweden, transthoracic oesophagectomy was performed in 94·7 per cent of patients, whereas in the Netherlands, a transhiatal approach was undertaken in 35·8 per cent. Higher annual procedural volumes per hospital were observed in the Netherlands. Adjusted 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality after gastrectomy was statistically significantly lower in Sweden than in the Netherlands (odds ratio 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·29 to 0·95). Conclusion: For oesophageal and gastric cancer, there are differences in patient, tumour and treatment characteristics between Sweden and the Netherlands. Postoperative mortality in patients with gastric cancer was lower in Sweden.

Impact of upfront randomization for postoperative treatment on quality of surgery in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative randomization for postoperative treatment might affect quality of surgery. In the CRITICS trial (ChemoRadiotherapy after Induction chemotherapy In Cancer of the Stomach), patients were randomized before treatment to receive chemotherapy prior to a D1 + gastrectomy (removal of lymph node station (LNS) 1-9 + 11), followed by either chemotherapy (CT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT). In this analysis, the influence of upfront randomization on the quality of surgery was evaluated. METHODS: Quality of surgery was analyzed in both study arms using surgicopathological compliance (removal of ≥ 15 lymph nodes), surgical compliance (removal of the indicated LNS), and surgical contamination (removal of LNS that should be left in situ). Furthermore, the 'Maruyama Index of Unresected disease' (MI) was evaluated in both study arms, and validated with overall survival. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2015, 788 patients with gastric cancer were included in the CRITICS study of which 636 patients were operated with curative intent. No difference was observed between the CT and CRT group regarding surgicopathological compliance (74.8% vs 70.9%, P = 0.324), surgical compliance (43.2% vs 39.2%, P = 0.381), and surgical contamination (59.4% vs 59.9%, P = 0.567). Median MI was 1 in both groups (range CT 0-88 and CRT 0-136, P = 0.700). A MI below 5 was associated with better overall survival (CT: P = 0.009 and CRT: P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Surgical quality parameters were similar in both study arms in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial, indicating that upfront randomization for postoperative treatment had no impact on the quality of surgery. A Maruyama Index below five was associated with better overall survival.

North European comparison of treatment strategy and survival in older patients with resectable gastric cancer: A EURECCA upper gastrointestinal group analysis.

BACKGROUND: As older gastric cancer patients are often excluded from randomized clinical trials, the most appropriate treatment strategy for these patients remains unclear. The current study aimed to gain more insight in treatment strategies and relative survival of older patients with resectable gastric cancer across Europe. METHODS: Population-based cohorts from Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were combined. Patients ≥70 years with resectable gastric cancer (cT1-4a, cN0-2, cM0), diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 were included. Resection rates, administration of chemotherapy (irrespective of surgery), and relative survival within a country according to stage were determined. RESULTS: Overall, 6698 patients were included. The percentage of operated patients was highest in Belgium and lowest in Sweden for both stage II (74% versus 56%) and stage III disease (57% versus 25%). For stage III, chemotherapy administration was highest in Belgium (44%) and lowest in Sweden (2%). Three year relative survival for stage I, II, and III disease in Belgium was 67.8% (95% CI:62.8-72.6), 41.2% (95% CI:37.3-45.2), 17.8% (95% CI:12.5-24.0), compared with 56.7% (95% CI:51.5-61.7), 31.3% (95% CI:27.6-35.2), 8.2% (95% CI:4.4-13.4) in Sweden. There were no significant differences in treatment strategies of patients with stage I disease. CONCLUSION: Substantial treatment differences are observed across North European countries for patients with stages II and III resectable gastric cancer aged 70 years or older. In the present comparison, treatment strategies with a higher proportion of patients undergoing surgery seemed to be associated with higher survival rates for patients with stages II or III disease.

Association between hospital volume and quality of gastric cancer surgery in the CRITICS trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies investigating the association between hospital volume and quality of gastric cancer surgery are lacking. In the present study, the effect of hospital volume on quality of gastric cancer surgery was evaluated by analysing data from the CRITICS (ChemoRadiotherapy after Induction chemotherapy In Cancer of the Stomach) trial. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy with curative intent in the Netherlands were selected from the CRITICS trial database. Annual hospital volume of participating centres was derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospital volume was categorized into very low (1-10 gastrectomies per year per institution), low (11-20), medium (21-30) and high (31 or more), and linked to the CRITICS database. Quality of surgery was analysed by surgicopathological compliance (removal of at least 15 lymph nodes), surgical compliance (removal of indicated lymph node stations) and the Maruyama Index. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were also compared between hospital categories. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2015, 788 patients were included in the CRITICS study, of whom 494 were analysed. Surgicopathological compliance was higher (86·7 versus 50·4 per cent; P < 0·001), surgical compliance was greater (52·9 versus 19·8 per cent; P < 0·001) and median Maruyama Index was lower (0 versus 6; P = 0·006) in high-volume hospitals compared with very low-volume hospitals. There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications or mortality between the hospital volume categories. CONCLUSION: Surgery performed in high-volume hospitals was associated with better surgical quality than surgery carried out in lower-volume hospitals.

A Population-based Study on Lymph Node Retrieval in Patients with Esophageal Cancer: Results from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit.

BACKGROUND: For esophageal cancer, the number of retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) is often used as a quality indicator. The aim of this study is to analyze the number of retrieved LNs in The Netherlands, assess factors associated with LN yield, and explore the association with short-term outcomes. This is a population-based study on lymph node retrieval in patients with esophageal cancer, presenting results from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. STUDY DESIGN: For this retrospective national cohort study, patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent esophagectomy between 2011 and 2016 were included. The primary outcome was the number of retrieved LNs. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to test for association with ≥ 15 LNs. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: 3970 patients were included. Between 2011 and 2016, the median number of LNs increased from 15 to 20. Factors independently associated with ≥ 15 LNs were: 0-10 kg preoperative weight loss (versus: unknown weight loss, odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.71 [0.57-0.88]), Charlson score 0 (versus: Charlson score 2: 0.76 [0.63-0.92]), cN2 category (reference: cN0, 1.32 [1.05-1.65]), no neoadjuvant therapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (reference: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 1.73 [1.29-2.32] and 2.15 [1.54-3.01]), minimally invasive transthoracic (reference: open transthoracic, 1.46 [1.15-1.85]), open transthoracic (versus open and minimally invasive transhiatal, 0.29 [0.23-0.36] and 0.43 [0.32-0.59]), hospital volume of 26-50 or > 50 resections/year (reference: 0-25, 1.94 [1.55-2.42] and 3.01 [2.36-3.83]), and year of surgery [reference: 2011, odds ratios (ORs) 1.48, 1.53, 2.28, 2.44, 2.54]. There was no association of ≥ 15 LNs with short-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The number of LNs retrieved increased between 2011 and 2016. Weight loss, Charlson score, cN category, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical approach, year of resection, and hospital volume were all associated with increased LN yield. Retrieval of ≥ 15 LNs was not associated with increased postoperative morbidity/mortality.

Surgical morbidity and mortality after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial.

BACKGROUND: In order to determine the optimal combination of perioperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy for Western patients with advanced resectable gastric cancer, the international multicentre CRITICS trial (ChemoRadiotherapy after Induction chemotherapy In Cancer of the Stomach) was initiated. In this trial, patients with resectable gastric cancer were randomised before start of treatment between adjuvant chemotherapy or adjuvant chemoradiotherapy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus gastric cancer resection. The purpose of this study was to report on surgical morbidity and mortality in this trial, and to identify factors associated with surgical morbidity. METHODS: Patients who underwent a gastrectomy with curative intent were selected. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess risk factors for developing postoperative complications. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2015, 788 patients were included in the CRITICS trial, of whom 636 patients were eligible for current analyses. Complications occurred in 296 patients (47%). Postoperative mortality was 2.2% (n = 14). Complications due to anastomotic leakage was cause of death in 5 patients. Failure to complete preoperative chemotherapy (OR = 2.09, P = 0.004), splenectomy (OR = 2.82, P = 0.012), and male sex (OR = 1.55, P = 0.020) were associated with a greater risk for postoperative complications. Total gastrectomy and oesophago-cardia resection were associated with greater risk for morbidity compared with subtotal gastrectomy (OR = 1.88, P = 0.001 and OR = 1.89, P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: Compared to other Western studies, surgical morbidity in the CRITICS trial was slightly higher whereas mortality was low. Complications following anastomotic leakage was the most important factor for postoperative mortality. Important proxies for developing postoperative complications were failure to complete preoperative chemotherapy, splenectomy, male sex, total gastrectomy, and oesophago-cardia resection.

Time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for oesophageal or junctional cancer: A nationwide study.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal time between end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and oesophagectomy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the association between this interval and pathologic complete response rate (pCR), morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality. METHODS: Patients with oesophageal cancer treated with nCRT and surgery between 2011 and 2016 were selected from a national database: the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). The interval between end of nCRT and surgery was divided into six periods: 0-5 weeks (n = 157;A), 6-7 weeks (n = 878;B), 8-9 weeks (n = 972;C), 10-12 weeks (n = 720;D), 13-14 weeks (n = 195;E) and 15 or more weeks (n = 180;F). The association between these interval groups and outcomes was investigated using univariable and multivariable analysis with group C (8-9 weeks) as reference. RESULTS: In total, 3102 patients were included. The pCR rate for the groups A to F was 31%, 28%, 26%, 31%, 40% and 37%, respectively. A longer interval was associated with a higher probability of pCR (≥10 weeks for adenocarcinoma: odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.35 [1.00-1.83], 1.95 [1.24-3.07], 1.64 [0.99-2.71] and ≥13 weeks for squamous cell carcinoma: 2.86 [1.23-6.65], 2.67 [1.29-5.55]. Patients operated ≥10 weeks after nCRT had the same probability for intraoperative/postoperative complications. Patients from groups D and F had a higher 30-day/in-hospital mortality (1.80 [1.08-3.00], 3.19 [1.66-6.14]). CONCLUSION: An interval of ≥10 weeks for adenocarcinoma and ≥13 weeks for squamous cell carcinoma between nCRT and oesophagectomy was associated with a higher probability of having a pCR. Longer intervals were not associated with intraoperative/postoperative complications. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with extended intervals (10-12 and ≥15 weeks); however, this might have been due to residual confounding.

Failure-to-rescue in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal or gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Complex surgical procedures such as esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in postoperative morbidity, mortality, and associated failure-to-rescue (FTR), in patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for esophageal or gastric cancer in the Netherlands, and to investigate differences between the two groups. METHODS: All patients with esophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a potentially curative resection, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) between 2011 and 2014, were included. Primary outcomes were (major) postoperative complications, postoperative mortality and FTR. To investigate groups' effect on the outcomes of interest a mixed model was used. RESULTS: Overall, 2644 patients with esophageal cancer and 1584 patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. In patients with gastric cancer, postoperative mortality (7.7% in 2011 vs. 3.8% in 2014) and FTR (38% in 2011 and 19% in 2014) decreased significantly over the years. The adjusted risk of developing a major postoperative complication was lower (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42-0.70), but the risk of FTR was higher (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.05-3.27) in patients with gastric cancer compared to patients with esophageal cancer. CONCLUSION: Once a postoperative complication occurred, patients with gastric cancer were more likely to die compared to patients with esophageal cancer. Underlying mechanisms like patient selection, and differences in structure and organization of care should be investigated. Next to morbidity and mortality, failure-to-rescue should be considered as an important outcome measure after esophagogastric cancer resections.

Quality control of lymph node dissection in the Dutch Gastric Cancer Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines indicate that D2 resection is the standard of care for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. To assess the impact of quality assurance of lymph node removal, non-compliance and contamination in the D1 and D2 study arms of the Dutch Gastric Cancer Trial were investigated with respect to recurrence and survival. METHODS: The location and numbers of lymph nodes detected at pathological investigation in the Dutch Gastric Cancer Trial were compared according to the guidelines of the Japanese Research Society for the study of Gastric Cancer. Non-compliance was defined as inadequate removal of lymph node stations. Contamination was defined as lymph nodes removed outside the intended level of resection. The dissection groups D1 and D2 were divided into non-compliance, compliance and contamination categories. Long-term overall survival was calculated for minor (2 or fewer lymph nodes) and major (more than 2 lymph nodes) non-compliance and contamination in the D1 and D2 group, using Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Some 1078 patients were included, of whom 711 with potentially curative surgical resections were evaluated. Overall non-compliance was 80·5 per cent in the D1 and 81·6 per cent in the D2 group. Major non-compliance occurred in 15·3 per cent of the D1 and 26·0 per cent of the D2 group. Major contamination hardly occurred. Overall 15-year survival rates in the randomized groups were 21·2 per cent (D1) and 29·0 per cent (D2) (P = 0·351). After exclusion of patients with major non-compliance and/or major contamination, survival rates were 23·2 per cent (319 patients) and 32·6 per cent (245) respectively (P = 0·261). Where there was major non-compliance, survival rates in the D1 (58 patients) and D2 (86) groups were 10 and 17 per cent respectively (P = 0·302). Survival in the D2 compliant + contaminated group (139 patients) was significantly better than that in the D1 group without contamination (282): 35·7 versus 19·9 per cent (P = 0·041). In the D2 group, there was a significant difference in survival between contaminated (95 patients) and non-contaminated (236) groups: 39 versus 25·1 per cent (P = 0·041). CONCLUSION: Non-compliance in the D2 dissection group may have obscured a significant difference in survival between the randomized groups. A D2 dissection with contamination was associated with the best survival, suggesting that extended D2 lymph node dissections improve survival.

Common data items in seven European oesophagogastric cancer surgery registries: towards a European upper GI cancer audit (EURECCA Upper GI).

AIMS: Seven countries (Denmark, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom) collaborated to initiate a EURECCA (European Registration of Cancer Care) Upper GI project. The aim of this study was to identify a core dataset of shared items in the different data registries which can be used for future collaboration between countries. METHODS: Item lists from all participating Upper GI cancer registries were collected. Items were scored 'present' when included in the registry, or when the items could be deducted from other items in the registry. The definition of a common item was that it was present in at least six of the seven participating countries. RESULTS: The number of registered items varied between 40 (Poland) and 650 (Ireland). Among the 46 shared items were data on patient characteristics, staging and diagnostics, neoadjuvant treatment, surgery, postoperative course, pathology, and adjuvant treatment. Information on non-surgical treatment was available in only 4 registries. CONCLUSIONS: A list of 46 shared items from seven participating Upper GI cancer registries was created, providing a basis for future quality assurance and research in Upper GI cancer treatment on a European level.

Changes in treatment patterns and their influence on long-term survival in patients with stages I-III gastric cancer in The Netherlands.

Studies investigating perioperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy changed the treatment of curable gastric cancer in The Netherlands. These changes were evaluated including their influence on survival. Data on patients diagnosed with gastric cancer from 1989 to 2009 were obtained from The Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes over time in surgery and administration of perioperative chemotherapy, 30-day mortality, 5-year survival and adjusted relative excess risk (RER) of dying were analyzed with multivariable regression for cardia and noncardia cancer. In stages I and II disease, most patients underwent surgery. Since 2005, more patients are treated with (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Postoperative mortality ranged from 1% to 7% and 0.4% to 12.2% in cardia and noncardia cancer (<55 to 75+ years). Five-year survival for cardia cancer and noncardia cancer stages I-III and X (unknown stage) was 33% and 50% (2005-2008). The RER of dying was associated with period of diagnosis, age, gender, region, stage, (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy in case of cardia cancer and type of gastric resection in case of noncardia cancer. Administration of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy has increased. No improvement in long-term survival could yet be seen, though it is still too early to expect an improvement in survival as a result of the use of chemotherapy.

Differences in outcomes of oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery across Europe.

BACKGROUND: In several European countries, centralization of oesophagogastric cancer surgery has been realized and clinical audits initiated. The present study was designed to evaluate differences in resection rates, outcomes and annual hospital volumes between these countries, and to analyse the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes. METHODS: National data were obtained from cancer registries or clinical audits in the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and England. Differences in outcomes were analysed between countries and between hospital volume categories, adjusting for available case-mix factors. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2009, 10 854 oesophagectomies and 9010 gastrectomies were registered. Resection rates in England were 18·2 and 21·6 per cent for oesophageal and gastric cancer respectively, compared with 28·5-29·9 and 41·4-41·9 per cent in the Netherlands and Denmark (P < 0·001). The adjusted 30-day mortality rate after oesophagectomy was lowest in Sweden (1·9 per cent). After gastrectomy, the adjusted 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in the Netherlands (6·9 per cent) than in Sweden (3·5 per cent; P = 0·017) and Denmark (4·3 per cent; P = 0·029). Increasing hospital volume was associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate after oesophagectomy (odds ratio 0·55 (95 per cent confidence interval 0·42 to 0·72) for at least 41 versus 1-10 procedures per year) and gastrectomy (odds ratio 0·64 (0·41 to 0·99) for at least 21 versus 1-10 procedures per year). CONCLUSION: Hospitals performing larger numbers of oesophagogastric cancer resections had a lower 30-day mortality rate. Differences in outcomes between several European countries could not be explained by differences in hospital volumes. To understand these differences in outcomes and resection rates, with reliable case-mix adjustments, a uniform European upper gastrointestinal cancer audit with recording of standardized data is warranted.

Influence of hospital type on outcomes after oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes after oesophagectomy and gastrectomy vary considerably between hospitals. Possible explanations include differences in case mix, hospital volume and hospital type. The present study examined the distribution of oesophagectomies and gastrectomies between hospital types in the Netherlands, and the relationship between hospital type and outcome. METHODS: Data were obtained from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were categorized as university hospitals (UH), non-university teaching hospitals (NUTH) and non-university non-teaching hospitals (NUNTH). Hospital type-outcome relationships were analysed by Cox regression, adjusting for case mix, hospital volume, year of diagnosis and use of multimodal therapies. RESULTS: Between 1989 and 2009, 10 025 oesophagectomies and 14 221 gastrectomies for cancer were performed in the Netherlands. The percentage of oesophagectomies and gastrectomies performed in UH increased from 17·6 and 6·4 per cent respectively in 1989 to 44·1 and 12·9 per cent in 2009. After oesophagectomy, the 3-month mortality rate was 2·5 per cent in UH, 4·4 per cent in NUTH and 4·1 per cent in NUNTH (P = 0·006 for UH versus NUTH). After gastrectomy, the 3-month mortality rate was 4·9 per cent in UH, 8·9 per cent in NUTH and 8·7 per cent in NUNTH (P < 0·001 for UH versus NUTH). Three-year survival was also higher in UH than in NUTH and NUNTH. CONCLUSION: Oesophagogastric resections performed in UH were associated with better outcomes but, owing to variation in outcomes within hospital types, centres of excellence cannot be designated solely on hospital type. Detailed information on case mix and outcomes is needed to identify centres of excellence.

Preoperative chemotherapy does not influence the number of evaluable lymph nodes in resected gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: While it is suggested that more than 15 lymph nodes (LNs) should be evaluated for accurate staging of gastric cancer, LN yield in western countries is generally low. The effect of preoperative chemotherapy on LN yield in gastric cancer is unknown. The aim of the present study is to determine whether preoperative chemotherapy is associated with any difference in the number of LNs obtained from specimens of patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 1205 patients from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and 1220 patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) who underwent a gastrectomy with curative intent for gastric adenocarcinoma without receiving preoperative radiotherapy, LN yield was analyzed, comparing patients who received preoperative chemotherapy and patients who received no preoperative therapy. RESULTS: Of the 2425 patients who underwent a gastrectomy, 14% received preoperative chemotherapy. Median LN yields were 23 at MSKCC and 10 in the NCR. Despite this twofold difference in LN yield between the two populations, with multivariate Poisson regression, chemotherapy was not associated with LN yield of either population. Variables associated with increased LN yield were institution, female sex, lower age, total (versus distal) gastrectomy and increasing T-stage. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient series, treatment at MSKCC, female sex, lower age, total gastrectomy and increasing primary tumor stage were associated with a higher number of evaluated LNs. Preoperative chemotherapy was not associated with a decrease in LN yield. Evaluating more than 15 LNs after gastrectomy is feasible, with or without preoperative chemotherapy.