Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,373

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial

Open access
for the Surgical Co-operative Group, Cuschieri, A, Weeden, S, Fielding, J, Bancewicz, J, Craven, J, Joypaul, V, Sydes, M, Fayers, p·1999·British Journal of Cancer

Abstract

Controversy still exists on the optimal surgical resection for potentially curable gastric cancer. Much better long-term survival has been reported in retrospective/non-randomized studies with D2 resections that involve a radical extended regional lymphadenectomy than with the standard D1 resections. In this paper we report the long-term survival of patients entered into a randomized study, with follow-up to death or 3 years in 96% of patients and a median follow-up of 6.5 years. In this prospective trial D1 resection (removal of regional perigastric nodes) was compared with D2 resection (extended lymphadenectomy to include level 1 and 2 regional nodes). Central randomization followed a staging laparotomy. Out of 737 patients with histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma registered, 337 patients were ineligible by staging laparotomy because of advanced disease and 400 were randomized. The 5-year survival rates were 35% for D1 resection and 33% for D2 resection (difference -2%, 95% CI = -12%-8%). There was no difference in the overall 5-year survival between the two arms (HR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.87-1.39, where HR > 1 implies a survival benefit to D1 surgery). Survival based on death from gastric cancer as the event was similar in the D1 and D2 groups (HR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.39) as was recurrence-free survival (HR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.82-1.29). In a multivariate analysis, clinical stages II and III, old age, male sex and removal of spleen and pancreas were independently associated with poor survival. These findings indicate that the classical Japanese D2 resection offers no survival advantage over D1 surgery. However, the possibility that D2 resection without pancreatico-splenectomy may be better than standard D1 resection cannot be dismissed by the results of this trial.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.bjc.6690243

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,373

Metadata

Authors
for the Surgical Co-operative Group, Cuschieri, A., Weeden, S., Fielding, J., Bancewicz, J., Craven, J., Joypaul, V, Sydes, M., & Fayers, P.
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Published
1999-02-26
Volume
79
Issue
9-10
Pages
1522-1530
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
OpenAlex
W1970107675
Cited by
1,373
References
0
FWCI
40.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/sj.bjc.6690243
The paper
for the Surgical Co-operative Group, Cuschieri, A., Weeden, S., Fielding, J., Bancewicz, J., Craven, J., Joypaul, V, Sydes, M., & Fayers, P. (1999). Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. British Journal of Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6690243

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.