Skip to main content
Log in

Tumor size as a simple prognostic indicator for gastric carcinoma

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript


Background: Tumor size can be measured easily before or during operation with no special tools, but its prognostic use in patients with gastric carcinoma is still unclear.

Methods: Clinicopathologic data of 479 patients who underwent curative operation for gastric carcinoma were studied. The relationship between tumor size and survival of patients was investigated.

Results: The patients were divided into three groups: 182 with tumors measuring <4 cm (group I), 252 with tumors of 4–10 cm (group II), and 45 with tumors of ⩾10 cm (group III). The 10-year survival rates for group I, II, and III patients were 92%, 66%, and 33%, respectively (p<0.01), and the three groups were significantly different with regard to depth of invasion (p<0.01), number and level of lymph node metastasis (p<0.01), and stage of disease (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis indicated that tumor size independently influenced the survival of patients.

Conclusions: Tumor size clinically serves as a simple predictor of tumor progression and survival of patients in gastric carcinoma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Bozzetti F, Bonfanti G, Morabito A, et al. A multifactorial approach for the prognosis of patients with carcinoma of the stomach after curative resection.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1986;162:229–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Adachi Y, Mori M, Maehara Y, et al. Dukes classification: a valid prognostic indicator for gastric cancer.Gut 1994;35:1368–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Adachi Y, Kamakura T, Mori M, et al. Prognostic significance of the number of positive lymph nodes in gastric carcinoma.Br J Surg 1994;81:414–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Adachi Y, Oshiro T, Okuyama T, et al. A simple classification of lymph node level in gastric carcinoma.Am J Surg 1995;169:382–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Adachi Y, Mori M, Maehara Y, Sugimachi K. Long-term survival after resection for advanced gastric carcinoma.J Clin Gastroenterol 1995;21:208–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haugstvedt TK, Viste A, Eide GE, et al. Norwegian multicentre study of survival and prognostic factors in patients undergoing curative resection for gastric carcinoma.Br J Surg 1993;80:475–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moriguchi S, Maehara Y, Korenaga D, et al. Prediction of survival time after curative surgery for advanced gastric cancer.Eur J Surg Oncol 1992;18:287–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Japanese Research Society for Gastric Cancer. The general rules for gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology.Jpn J Surg 1981;11:127–45.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nakamura K, Ueyama T, Yao T, et al. Pathology and prognosis of gastric carcinoma: findings in 10,000 patients who underwent primary gastrectomy.Cancer 1992;70:1030–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Maehara Y, Okuyama T, Moriguchi S, et al. Prophylactic lymph node dissection in patients with advanced gastric cancer promotes increased survival time.Cancer 1992;70:392–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu CW, Hsieh MJ, Lo SS, et al. Lymph node metastasis from carcinoma of the distal one-third of the stomach.Cancer 1994;73:2059–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Maruyama K. The most important prognostic factors for gastric cancer patients.Scand J Gastroenterol 1987;22:63–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adachi, Y., Oshiro, T., Mori, M. et al. Tumor size as a simple prognostic indicator for gastric carcinoma. Annals of Surgical Oncology 4, 137–140 (1997).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

Key Words