Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,021

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

D2 Lymphadenectomy Alone or with Para-aortic Nodal Dissection for Gastric Cancer

Open access
Sasako, Mitsuru, Sano, Takeshi, Yamamoto, Seiichiro, Kurokawa, Yukinori, Nashimoto, Atsushi, Kurita, Akira, Hiratsuka, Masahiro, Tsujinaka, Toshimasa, Kinoshita, Taira, Arai, Kuniyoshi, Yamamura, Yoshitaka, Okajima, Kunio·2008·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is the standard treatment for curable gastric cancer in eastern Asia. Whether the addition of para-aortic nodal dissection (PAND) to D2 lymphadenectomy for stage T2, T3, or T4 tumors improves survival is controversial. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial at 24 hospitals in Japan to compare D2 lymphadenectomy alone with D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND in patients undergoing gastrectomy for curable gastric cancer. METHODS: Between July 1995 and April 2001, 523 patients with curable stage T2b, T3, or T4 gastric cancer were randomly assigned during surgery to D2 lymphadenectomy alone (263 patients) or to D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND (260 patients). We did not permit any adjuvant therapy before the recurrence of cancer. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The rates of surgery-related complications among patients assigned to D2 lymphadenectomy alone and those assigned to D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND were 20.9% and 28.1%, respectively (P=0.07). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the frequencies of anastomotic leakage, pancreatic fistula, abdominal abscess, pneumonia, or death from any cause within 30 days after surgery (the rate of death was 0.8% in each group). The median operation time was 63 minutes longer and the median blood loss was 230 ml greater in the group assigned to D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND. The 5-year overall survival rate was 69.2% for the group assigned to D2 lymphadenectomy alone and 70.3% for the group assigned to D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND; the hazard ratio for death was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.37; P=0.85). There were no significant differences in recurrence-free survival between the two groups; the hazard ratio for recurrence was 1.08 (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.42; P=0.56). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with D2 lymphadenectomy alone, treatment with D2 lymphadenectomy plus PAND does not improve the survival rate in curable gastric cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00149279.)

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa0707035

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,021

Metadata

Authors
Sasako, M., Sano, T., Yamamoto, S., Kurokawa, Y., Nashimoto, A., Kurita, A., Hiratsuka, M., Tsujinaka, T., Kinoshita, T., Arai, K., Yamamura, Y., & Okajima, K.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2008-07-31
Volume
359
Issue
5
Pages
453-462
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2060731557
Cited by
1,021
References
1
FWCI
53.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: D2 Lymphadenectomy Alone or with Para-aortic Nodal Dissection for Gastric Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa0707035
The paper
Sasako, M., Sano, T., Yamamoto, S., Kurokawa, Y., Nashimoto, A., Kurita, A., Hiratsuka, M., Tsujinaka, T., Kinoshita, T., Arai, K., Yamamura, Y., & Okajima, K. (2008). D2 Lymphadenectomy Alone or with Para-aortic Nodal Dissection for Gastric Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0707035

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.