Quality of care indicators for the surgical treatment of gastric cancer: a systematic review

Improving the quality of patient care in lung cancer: key factors for successful multidisciplinary team working

International Guidelines as well as Cancer Associations recommend a multidisciplinary approach to lung cancer care. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) can significantly improve treatment decision-making and patient coordination by putting different physicians and other health professionals "in the same room", who collectively decide upon the best possible treatment. However, this is not a panacea for cancer treatment. The impact of multidisciplinary care (MDC) on patient outcomes is not univocal, while the effective functioning of the MDT depends on many factors. This review presents the available MDT literature with an emphasis on the key factors that characterize high-quality patient care in lung cancer. The study was conducted with a bibliographic search using different electronic databases (PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Google) referring to multidisciplinary cancer care settings. Many key elements appear consolidated, while others emerge as prevalent and actual, especially those related to visible barriers which work across geographic, organizational, and disciplinary boundaries. MDTs must be sustained by strategic management, structured within the entity, and cannot be managed as a separate care process. Furthermore, they need to coordinate with other teams (within and outside the organization) and join with the broad range of services delivered by multiple providers at various points of the cancer journey or within the system, with the vision of integrated care.

Perioperative quality indicators specific to the practice of anesthesia in noncardiac surgery: an umbrella review

PURPOSE

Improvement in delivery of perioperative care depends on the ability to measure outcomes that can direct meaningful changes in practice. We sought to identify and provide an overview of perioperative quality indicators specific to the practice of anesthesia in noncardiac surgery.

SOURCE

We conducted an umbrella review (a systematic review of systematic reviews) according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. We included systematic reviews examining perioperative indicators in patients ≥ 18 yr of age undergoing noncardiac surgery. Our primary outcome was any quality indicator specific to anesthesia. Indicators were classified by the Donabedian system and perioperative phase of care. The quality of systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR 2 criteria. Level of evidence of quality indicators was stratified by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Classification.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Our search returned 1,475 studies. After removing duplicates and screening of abstracts and full texts, 23 systematic reviews encompassing 3,164 primary studies met our inclusion criteria. There were 330 unique quality indicators. Process indicators were most common (n = 169), followed by outcome (n = 114) and structure indicators (n = 47). Few identified indicators were supported by high-level evidence (45/330, 14%). Level 1 evidence supported indicators of antibiotic prophylaxis (1a), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (1a), postoperative nausea/vomiting prophylaxis (1b), maintenance of normothermia (1a), and goal-directed fluid therapy (1b).

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review highlights the scarcity of perioperative quality indicators that are supported by high quality evidence. Future development of quality indicators and recommendations for outcome measurement should focus on metrics that are supported by level 1 evidence. Potential targets for evidence-based quality-improvement programs in anesthesia are identified herein.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020164691); first registered 28 April 2020.

Current Trends in Volume and Surgical Outcomes in Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is ranked as the fifth most frequently diagnosed type of cancer. Complete resection with adequate lymphadenectomy represents the goal of treatment with curative intent. Quality assurance is a crucial factor in the evaluation of oncological surgical care, and centralization of healthcare in referral hospitals has been proposed in several countries. However, an international agreement about the setting of “high-volume hospitals” as well as “minimum volume standards” has not yet been clearly established. Despite the clear postoperative mortality benefits that have been described for gastric cancer surgery conducted by high-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals, many authors have highlighted the limitations of a non-composite variable to define the ideal postoperative period. The textbook outcome represents a multidimensional measure assessing the quality of care for cancer patients. Transparent and easily available hospital data will increase patients’ awareness, providing suitable elements for a more informed hospital choice.

Intraoperative frozen section analysis of margin status as a quality indicator in gastric cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Positive pathologic margins following gastric cancer (GC) resection carries a poor prognosis. We evaluated intraoperative frozen section (IFS) analysis of resection margins (RMs) as a quality indicator in GC surgery.

METHODS

Patients referred to a provincial cancer agency with surgically resected non-metastatic GC between 2004 and 2012 were included. Associations between IFS analysis, other baseline characteristics, RMs, and overall survival (OS) were assessed using logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analyses, and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

Among 377 patients, median age was 67 years, 68% were male, and 16% had +RMs. Thirty-four percent of patients underwent IFS analysis, which protected against +RMs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-0.73, p = 0.006) and improved OS (hazards ratio [HR]: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54-0.98, p = 0.037). OS following re-resection of IFS positive patients was similar to IFS negative patients (69 vs. 54 months, p = 0.317). Stage III disease (OR: 12.8, 95% CI: 3.00-55.0, p = 0.001) and gastroesophageal junction tumors (OR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.05-4.78, p = 0.036) predicted +RMs. Stage III disease led to worse OS (HR: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.92-4.34, p < 0.001) while intestinal histology improved OS (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50-0.90, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

IFS analysis reduce +RMs and improve OS and should be incorporated in curative intent GC surgery for patients with locally advanced GC.

Quality performance indicators for the surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma: a systematic review

Background

A systematic review was undertaken to identify existing quality performance indicators (QPI) for the surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with the aim of defining a set of QPIs that can be used to assist in the accreditation of institutions for training, allow cross jurisdiction comparison of treatment and outcomes, as well as provide a basis to develop quality improvement programs. These QPI's capture key components of patient care that are fundamental to overall outcome.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS with all literature available until the date of 1 August 2021 included. Search terms utilized were ‘Quality of health care OR Quality improvement or Quality control OR Quality indicators’, AND ‘Gastrectomy’ OR ‘Stomach neoplasm’ OR ‘Adenocarcinoma’ OR ‘Gastric resection’ OR ‘Gastric cancer’.

Results

Twelve articles were included in the final analysis. The selected studies included editorials (n = 2), retrospective review of institutional experience (n = 5), cohort studies (n = 2), survey methodology (n = 1), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus statement (n = 1). For GC QPIs, process measures included patient discussion at multi‐disciplinary meetings, access to perioperative multimodal diagnostic pathways, and specific surgical metrics (margin negative resections and adequate lymphadenectomy). Outcome measures included the RO resection rate, reoperation, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

There is a relative paucity of internationally agreed QPI for the surgical management of gastric adenocarcinoma. The data from this review will form the basis of a project to develop internationally agreed and feasible QPI for gastric cancer resections.

Quality Over Volume: Modeling Centralization of Gastric Cancer Resections in Italy

Background

The correlation between hospital volume and postoperative outcomes has led to the centralization of complex procedures in several countries. However, the results reported in relation to gastric cancer (GC) are contradictory. This study aimed to analyze GC surgical volumes and 30-day postoperative mortality in Italy and to provide a simulation for modeling centralization of GC resections based on district case volumes.

Methods

A national registry was used to identify all GC resections, record mortality rates, and track the national in-border GC resection health travel. Hospitals were grouped according to caseload. Centralization of all GC procedures performed within the same district was modeled. The outcome measures were a minimal volume of 25 GC resections/year and the 30-day postoperative mortality.

Results

In 2018, 5,873 GC resections were performed in 498 Italian hospitals (mean resections per hospital per year: 11.8); the postoperative mortality rate (5.51%) was tracked from 2016–2018. GC resection health travel ranged from 2% to 50.5%, with a significant (P<0.001) difference between northern and central/southern Italy. The mean mortality rate was 7.7% in hospitals performing one to 3 GC resections per year, compared with 4.7% in those with >17 GC resections/year (P≤0.01). Most Italian districts achieved 25 procedures/year after centralization; however, 66.3% of GC cases in southern Italy vs. 42.2% in central and 52.7% in the northern regions (P<0.001) required reallocation.

Conclusion

Postoperative mortality after GC resection correlated with hospital volume. Despite health travel, most Italian districts can reach a high-volume threshold, but discrepancies in mortality rates are alarming.

Trial Registration

Quality Standards for Surgery of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastasis After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The standardization of surgical outcomes throughout surgical procedures is mandatory. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) should provide proficient oncological and surgical outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

The aim of this study was to identify clinically relevant quality indicators and their quality standard, and to determine their acceptable quality limit. A systematic review on cytoreductive results from 2000 to 2018 was performed focusing on clinical guidelines, consensus conferences, and publications. After the selection of quality indicators, a systematic review of indexed references was performed in order to calculate the quality standard for each indicator.

STUDY SELECTION

Unicentric/multicentric series, comparative studies, and clinical trials. Studies were to include outcomes after cytoreduction of colorectal origin and series with more than 50 patients. Quality indicators with at least 10 series were mandatory and objective measurements were also mandatory for inclusion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Quality indicators selected were 1- to 5-year survival, overall disease-free survival, 1- to 5-year disease-free survival, complete surgical resection, duration of surgery, length of stay, overall morbimortality, major morbidity, re-intervention, postoperative hemorrhage, intestinal fistula, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, postoperative medical complications, overall recurrence, and failure to rescue.

RESULTS

The most relevant quality indicators and critical quality limits were overall disease-free survival and 5-year overall disease-free survival (14 months and <10 months, and 14% and <4%, respectively), completeness of surgical resection (89% and <80%, respectively), overall mortality (3% and >8%, respectively), overall morbidity (47% and >63%, respectively), failure to rescue (12% and <30%, respectively), reintervention (13 and <22%, respectively), anastomotic leakage (6% and <13%, respectively), and overall recurrence (60% and <74%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to assess quality standards in CRS + HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases. The current data are of particular relevance for future studies to control the variability of this surgery.

Clinical Outcomes Following Regionalization of Gastric Cancer Care in a US Integrated Health Care System

PURPOSE

In 2016, Kaiser Permanente Northern California regionalized gastric cancer care, introducing a regional comprehensive multidisciplinary care team, standardizing staging and chemotherapy, and implementing laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy for patients eligible for curative-intent surgery. This study evaluated the effect of regionalization on outcomes.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study included gastric cancer cases diagnosed from January 2010 to May 2018. Information was obtained from the electronic medical record, cancer registry, state vital statistics, and chart review. Overall survival was compared in patients with all stages of disease, stage I-III disease, and curative-intent gastrectomy patients using annual inception cohorts. For the latter, the surgical approach and surgical outcomes were also compared.

RESULTS

Among 1,429 eligible patients with gastric cancer with all stages of disease, one third were treated after regionalization, 650 had stage I-III disease, and 394 underwent curative-intent surgery. Among surgical patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy utilization increased from 35% to 66% (P < .0001), laparoscopic gastrectomy increased from 18% to 92% (P < .0001), and D2 lymphadenectomy increased from 2% to 80% (P < .0001). Dissection of ≥ 15 lymph nodes increased from 61% to 95% (P < .0001). Surgical complication rates did not appear to increase after regionalization. Length of hospitalization decreased from 7 to 3 days (P < .001). Overall survival at 2 years was as follows: all stages, 32.8% pre and 37.3% post (P = .20); stage I-III cases with or without surgery, 55.6% and 61.1%, respectively (P = .25); and among surgery patients, 72.7% and 85.5%, respectively (P < .03).

CONCLUSION

Regionalization of gastric cancer care within an integrated system allowed comprehensive multidisciplinary care, conversion to laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy, increased overall survival among surgery patients, and no increase in surgical complications.

Hospital volume following major surgery for gastric cancer determines in-hospital mortality rate and failure to rescue: a nation-wide study based on German billing data (2009-2017)

BACKGROUND

For many cancer resections, a hospital volume-outcome relationship exists. The data regarding gastric cancer resection-especially in the western hemisphere-are ambiguous. This study analyzes the impact of gastric cancer surgery caseload per hospital on postoperative mortality and failure to rescue in Germany.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with gastric cancer from 2009 to 2017 who underwent gastric resection were identified from nation-wide administrative data. Hospitals were grouped into five equal caseload quintiles (I-V in ascending caseload order). Postoperative deaths and failure to rescue were determined.

RESULTS

Forty-six thousand one hundred eighty-seven patients were identified. There was a significant shift from partial resections in low-volume hospitals to more extended resections in high-volume centers. The overall in-house mortality rate was 6.2%. The crude in-hospital mortality rate ranged from 7.9% in quintile I to 4.4% in quintile V, with a significant trend between volume categories (p < 0.001). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, quintile V hospitals (average of 29 interventions/year) had a risk-adjusted odds ratio of 0.50 (95% CI 0.39-0.65), compared to the baseline in-house mortality rate in quintile I (on average 1.5 interventions/year) (p < 0.001). In an analysis only evaluating hospitals with more than 30 resections per year mortality dropped below 4%. The overall postoperative complication rate was comparable between different volume quintiles, but failure to rescue (FtR) decreased significantly with increasing caseload.

CONCLUSION

Patients who had gastric cancer surgery in hospitals with higher volume had better outcomes and a reduced failure to rescue rates for severe complications.

Reorganizing the Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in a Tertiary Centre for Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Adds Value to the Internal and Regional Care Pathways. A Mixed Method Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The reorganisation of the structure of a Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Multidisciplinary Team Meeting (GIO-MDTM) in a tertiary centre with three care pathways is evaluated on added value.

METHODS

In a mixed method investigation, process indicators such as throughput times were analysed and stakeholders were interviewed regarding benefits and drawbacks of the reorganisation and current MDTM functioning.

RESULTS

For the hepatobiliary care pathway, the time to treatment plan increased, but the time to start treatment reduced significantly. The percentage of patients treated within the Dutch standard of 63 days increased for the three care pathways. From the interviews, three themes emerged: added value of MDTMs, focus on planning integrated care and awareness of possible improvements.

DISCUSSION

The importance of evaluating interventions in oncology care pathways is shown, including detecting unexpected drawbacks. The evaluation provides insight into complex dynamics of the care pathways and contributes with recommendations on functioning of an MDTM.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughput times are only partly determined by oncology care pathway management, but have influence on the functioning of MDTMs. Process indicator information can help to reflect on integration of care in the region, resulting in an increase of patients treated within the Dutch standard.

Effect of Hospital Volume With Respect to Performing Gastric Cancer Resection on Recurrence and Survival: Results From the CRITICS Trial

OBJECTIVE

We examined the association between surgical hospital volume and both overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) using data obtained from the international CRITICS (ChemoRadiotherapy after Induction chemotherapy In Cancer of the Stomach) trial.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

In the CRITICS trial, patients with resectable gastric cancer were randomized to receive preoperative chemotherapy followed by adequate gastrectomy and either chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Patients in the CRITICS trial who underwent a gastrectomy with curative intent in a Dutch hospital were included in the analysis. The annual number of gastric cancer surgeries performed at the participating hospitals was obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry; the hospitals were then classified as low-volume (1-20 surgeries/year) or high-volume (≥21 surgeries/year) and matched with the CRITICS trial data. Univariate and multivariate analyses were then performed to evaluate the hazard ratio (HR) between hospital volume and both OS and DFS.

RESULTS

From 2007 through 2015, 788 patients were included in the CRITICS trial. Among these 788 patients, 494 were eligible for our study; the median follow-up was 5.0 years. Five-year OS was 59.2% and 46.1% in the high-volume and low-volume hospitals, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that undergoing surgery in a high-volume hospital was associated with higher OS [HR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50-0.94, P = 0.020] and DFS (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.99, P = 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

In the CRITICS trial, hospitals with a high annual volume of gastric cancer surgery were associated with higher overall and DFS. These findings emphasize the value of centralizing gastric cancer surgeries in the Western world.

A population-based study on intestinal and diffuse type adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and stomach in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2015

AIM

To investigate the nationwide time trends in incidence and survival of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas according to the Laurén classification (intestinal, diffuse and mixed type).

METHODS

All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands with oesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma between 1989 and 2015 were included. A syntax was developed to determine the histological subtype based on pathology reports as archived in the Dutch pathology registry. These reports were linked to individual data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Relative survival was used to assess survival.

RESULTS

The histological subtype could be determined in 18.691 (84.1%) oesophageal and in 32.312 (83.5%) gastric adenocarcinomas. Among these, 79% were intestinal and 21% diffuse type in oesophageal cancers, compared to 55% intestinal and 44% diffuse type in gastric cancers. Relative median survival of intestinal type tumours was longer than that of diffuse type tumours, that is, 12.1 versus 9.4 months for oesophageal carcinomas, and 10.1 versus 7.6 months for gastric carcinomas, respectively. Between 1989 and 2015, the relative median survival of non-metastatic intestinal and diffuse type oesophageal adenocarcinoma improved from 12.0 to 30.0 months, and from 12.0 to 19.2 months, respectively. The same was true for intestinal type gastric carcinoma (from 22.8 to 27.6 months) but for diffuse type gastric carcinoma, the increase was less (from 16.8 to 18.0 months).

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide study, histological subtypes of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas differed in incidence and survival times. These findings may call for a differentiated treatment approach.

Short-term outcomes in minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy: the differences between East and West. A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive surgical techniques for gastric cancer are gaining more interest worldwide. Several Asian studies have proven the benefits of minimally invasive techniques over the open techniques. Nevertheless, implementation of this technique in Western countries is gradual. The aim of this systematic review is to give insight in the differences in outcomes and patient characteristics in Asian countries in comparison to Western countries.

METHODOLOGY

An extensive systematic search was conducted using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Analysis of the outcomes was performed regarding operative results, postoperative recovery, complications, mortality, lymph node yield, radicality of the resected specimen, and survival. A total of 12 Asian and 8 Western studies were included.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive gastrectomy shows faster postoperative recovery, fewer complications, and similar outcomes regarding mortality in both the Eastern and Western studies. However, patient characteristics such as age and BMI differ between these populations. Comparison of overall outcomes in minimally invasive and open procedures between East and West showed differences in complications, mortality, and number of resected lymph nodes in favor of the Asian population.

CONCLUSION

Improved outcomes are observed following minimally invasive gastrectomy in comparison to open procedures in both Western and Asian studies. There are differences in patient characteristics between the Western and Asian populations. Overall outcomes seem to be in favor of the Asian population. These differences may fade with centralization of care for gastric cancer patients in the West and increasing surgical experience.

Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Quality assurance is acknowledged as a crucial factor in the assessment of oncological surgical care. The aim of this study was to develop a composite measure of multiple outcome parameters defined as 'textbook outcome', to assess quality of care for patients undergoing oesophagogastric cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients with oesophagogastric cancer, operated on with the intent of curative resection between 2011 and 2014, were identified from a national database (Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit). Textbook outcome was defined as the percentage of patients who underwent a complete tumour resection with at least 15 lymph nodes in the resected specimen and an uneventful postoperative course, without hospital readmission. Hospital variation in textbook outcome was analysed after adjustment for case-mix factors.

RESULTS

In total, 2748 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1772 with gastric cancer were included in this study. A textbook outcome was achieved in 29·7 per cent of patients with oesophageal cancer and 32·1 per cent of those with gastric cancer. Adjusted textbook outcome rates varied from 8·5 to 52·4 per cent between hospitals. The outcome parameter 'at least 15 lymph nodes examined' had the greatest negative impact on a textbook outcome both for patients with oesophageal cancer and for those with gastric cancer.

CONCLUSION

Most patients did not achieve a textbook outcome and there was wide variation between hospitals.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Short-Term Outcomes and Completeness of Resection : Surgical Techniques in Gastric Cancer

Minimally invasive surgical techniques for gastric cancer are gaining more acceptance worldwide as an alternative to open resection. In order to assess the role of minimally invasive and open techniques in total gastrectomy for cancer, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Articles comparing minimally invasive versus open total gastrectomy were reviewed, collected from the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Two different authors (JS and NW) independently selected and assessed the articles. Outcomes regarding operative results, postoperative recovery, morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Statistical analysis portrayed the weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95 % confidence interval and odds ratio (OR). Out of 1242 papers, 12 studies were selected, including a total of 1360 patients, of which 592 underwent minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG). Compared to open total gastrectomy (OTG), MITG showed a longer operation time (WMD: 48.06 min, P < 0.00001), less operative blood loss (WMD: −160.70 mL, P < 0.00001), faster postoperative recovery, measured as shorter time to first flatus (WMD −1.05 days, P < 0.00001), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD: −2.43 days, P = 0.0002), less postoperative complications (OR 0.66, P = 0.02), similar mortality rates (OR 0.60, P = 0.52), and similar rates in lymph node yield (WMD −2.30, P = 0.06). Minimally invasive total gastrectomy showed faster postoperative recovery and less postoperative complications, whereas completeness of the resection was similar in both groups. Duration of surgery was longer in the minimally invasive group. Only comparative non-randomized studies were available, further emphasizing the need for a prospective randomized trial comparing MITG and OTG.

Surgical techniques, open versus minimally invasive gastrectomy after chemotherapy (STOMACH trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has been shown to provide important advantages in comparison with open procedures in the treatment of several malignant diseases, such as less perioperative blood loss and faster patient recovery. It also maintains similar results with regard to tumor resection margins and oncological long-term survival. In gastric cancer the role of laparoscopic surgery remains unclear.

Current recommended treatment for gastric cancer consists of radical resection of the stomach, with a free margin of 5 to 6 cm from the tumor, combined with a lymphadenectomy. The extent of the lymphadenectomy is considered a marker for radicality of surgery and quality of care. Therefore, it is imperative that a novel surgical technique, such as minimally invasive total gastrectomy, should be non-inferior with regard to radicality of surgery and lymph node yield.

Methods/Design

The Surgical Techniques, Open versus Minimally invasive gastrectomy After CHemotherapy (STOMACH) study is a randomized, clinical multicenter trial. All adult patients with primary carcinoma of the stomach, in which the tumor is considered surgically resectable (T1-3, N0-1, M0) after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, are eligible for inclusion and randomization. The primary endpoint is quality of oncological resection, measured by radicality of surgery and number of retrieved lymph nodes. The pathologist is blinded towards patient allocation. Secondary outcomes include patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) regarding quality of life, postoperative complications and cost-effectiveness. Based on a non-inferiority model for lymph node yield, with an average lymph node yield of 20, a non-inferiority margin of −4 and a 90% power to detect non-inferiority, a total of 168 patients are to be included.

Discussion

The STOMACH trial is a prospective, multicenter, parallel randomized study to define the optimal surgical strategy in patients with proximal or central gastric cancer after neo-adjuvant therapy: the conventional ‘open’ approach or minimally invasive total gastrectomy.

Trial registration

This trial was registered on 28 April 2014 at Clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT02130726.

Survival nomogram for curatively resected Korean gastric cancer patients: multicenter retrospective analysis with external validation

BACKGROUND

A small number of nomograms have been previously developed to predict the individual survival of patients who undergo curative resection for gastric cancer. However, all were derived from single high-volume centers. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a nomogram for gastric cancer patients using a multicenter database.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinicopathological and survival data of 2012 patients who underwent curative resection for gastric cancer between 2001 and 2006 at eight centers. Among these centers, six institutions were randomly assigned to the development set, and the other two centers were assigned to the validation set. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazard regression model was performed, and discrimination and calibration were evaluated by external validation.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed that age, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, depth of invasion, and metastatic lymph nodes were significant prognostic factors for overall survival. In the external validation, the concordance index was 0.831 (95% confidence interval, 0.784-0.878), and Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistic was 3.92 (P = 0.917).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a nomogram to predict 5-year overall survival after curative resection for gastric cancer based on a multicenter database. This nomogram can be broadly applied even in general hospitals and is useful for counseling patients, and scheduling follow-up.