{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]],"date-time":"2026-08-24T11:23:29Z","timestamp":1787570609008,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":19,"publisher":"MDPI AG","issue":"9","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]],"date-time":"2026-08-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1787529600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Curr. Oncol.","Current Oncology"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Background: Prognostic assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and curative gastrectomy remains challenging in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma because postoperative outcomes are influenced by both pretreatment disease burden and pathological response. We aimed to develop and internally validate a clinicopathological prognostic model and a simple postoperative risk classification for predicting disease-free survival (DFS). Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by curative gastrectomy. Pretreatment clinicopathological variables, Becker tumor regression grade (TRG), and serum tumor markers were evaluated. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of favorable pathological response, whereas Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify independent prognostic factors for disease-free survival (DFS). Sequential prognostic models were developed and internally validated using 1000 bootstrap resamples. A simplified postoperative clinicopathological risk classification based on pretreatment clinical N stage and Becker tumor regression grade was additionally developed to facilitate clinical interpretation and postoperative risk stratification. Results: A total of 109 patients were included. Favorable pathological response (Becker TRG1\u20132) was achieved in 68 patients (62.4%), whereas 41 patients (37.6%) had minimal or no pathological response (TRG3). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, pretreatment clinical T stage (cT4 vs. cT1\u20133) and clinical N stage (cN2\u20133 vs. cN0\u20131) were independently associated with a lower likelihood of achieving a favorable pathological response. For disease-free survival, pretreatment clinical N stage, Becker tumor regression grade, and log10-transformed CA19-9 remained independent prognostic factors in the multivariable Cox model. Sequential model development demonstrated progressive improvement in model discrimination, with the optimism-corrected Harrell\u2019s C-index increasing from 0.697 for the clinical N stage model to 0.770 for the final model incorporating clinical N stage, Becker tumor regression grade, and CA19-9. Bootstrap internal validation demonstrated minimal optimism, and calibration analysis showed good agreement between predicted and observed disease-free survival. A simple postoperative clinicopathological risk classification successfully stratified patients into distinct prognostic groups. Conclusions: A clinicopathological prognostic model integrating pretreatment clinical N stage, Becker tumor regression grade, and serum CA19-9 demonstrated improved prognostic discrimination for disease-free survival compared with clinical N stage alone. The derived postoperative risk classification may provide a simple framework for postoperative risk stratification and could assist in individualizing postoperative surveillance. External validation is warranted before routine clinical implementation.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3390\/curroncol33090500","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]],"date-time":"2026-08-24T10:07:53Z","timestamp":1787566073000},"page":"500","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/mdpi_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Development of a Clinicopathological Prognostic Model and Risk Classification to Predict Disease-Free Survival in Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Curative Gastrectomy"],"prefix":"10.3390","volume":"33","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5238-0522","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Erdo\u011fan","family":"\u015eeyran","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Van Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Van 65300, T\u00fcrkiye"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Emre","family":"Haf\u0131zo\u011flu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Medical Oncology, Bursa City Hospital, Bursa 16110, T\u00fcrkiye"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"1968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref_1","first-page":"229","article-title":"Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries","volume":"74","author":"Bray","year":"2024","journal-title":"CA Cancer J. Clin."},{"key":"ref_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102226","DOI":"10.1016\/j.esmoop.2023.102226","article-title":"Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with gastric cancer","volume":"9","author":"Shitara","year":"2024","journal-title":"ESMO Open"},{"key":"ref_3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1016\/j.suronc.2019.10.002","article-title":"Pathological response and outcome after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with DOC (docetaxel, oxaliplatin, capecitabine) or EOF (epirubicin, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil) for clinical T3-T4 non-metastatic gastric cancer","volume":"32","author":"Petrioli","year":"2020","journal-title":"Surg. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"217","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa2503701","article-title":"Perioperative Durvalumab in Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer","volume":"393","author":"Janjigian","year":"2025","journal-title":"N. Engl. J. Med."},{"key":"ref_5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"169","DOI":"10.6004\/jnccn.2025.0022","article-title":"Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2025, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology","volume":"23","author":"Ajani","year":"2025","journal-title":"J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw."},{"key":"ref_6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1521","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.11660","article-title":"Histomorphology and grading of regression in gastric carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy","volume":"98","author":"Becker","year":"2003","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"ref_7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e00860","DOI":"10.14309\/ctg.0000000000000860","article-title":"Predictive Value of Tumor Regression Grading on the Prognosis of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","volume":"16","author":"Wu","year":"2025","journal-title":"Clin. Transl. Gastroenterol."},{"key":"ref_8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"378","DOI":"10.21873\/invivo.13089","article-title":"Neutrophil-lymphocyte Ratio and Histological Response Correlate With Prognosis of Gastric Cancer Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy","volume":"37","author":"Urakawa","year":"2023","journal-title":"Vivo"},{"key":"ref_9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2023). Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2021 (6th edition). Gastric Cancer, 26, 1\u201325.","DOI":"10.1007\/s10120-022-01331-8"},{"key":"ref_10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1005","DOI":"10.1016\/j.annonc.2022.07.004","article-title":"ESMO Guidelines Committee. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up","volume":"33","author":"Lordick","year":"2022","journal-title":"Ann. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1918","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejso.2020.05.003","article-title":"CA19-9 is a significant prognostic marker of patients with stage III gastric cancer","volume":"46","author":"Kambara","year":"2020","journal-title":"Eur. J. Surg. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"16","DOI":"10.1186\/s12957-023-03291-4","article-title":"Development and evaluation of the Newstage system: Integrating tumor regression grade and lymph node status for improved prognostication in neoadjuvant treatment of gastric cancer","volume":"22","author":"Chen","year":"2024","journal-title":"World J. Surg. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sun, Y., Wen, L., Xiang, W., Luo, X., Chen, L., Yang, X., Yang, Y., Zhang, Y., Yu, S., and Xiao, H. (2025). Added value of pretreatment CT-based Node-RADS score for predicting survival outcome of locally advanced gastric cancer: Compared with clinical N stage. BMC Cancer, 25.","DOI":"10.1186\/s12885-025-14032-z"},{"key":"ref_14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1879","DOI":"10.1007\/s13304-021-01083-7","article-title":"A nomogram to predict overall survival and disease-free survival after curative-intent gastrectomy for gastric cancer","volume":"73","author":"Tonello","year":"2021","journal-title":"Updates Surg."},{"key":"ref_15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"401","DOI":"10.1007\/s10120-021-01258-6","article-title":"Prognostic value of tumor markers and ctDNA in patients with resectable gastric cancer receiving perioperative treatment: Results from the CRITICS trial","volume":"25","author":"Slagter","year":"2022","journal-title":"Gastric Cancer"},{"key":"ref_16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"108359","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejso.2024.108359","article-title":"Predicting peritoneal recurrence after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Validation of a prediction model (PERI-Gastric 1 and PERI-Gastric 2) on a Korean database","volume":"50","author":"Belia","year":"2024","journal-title":"Eur. J. Surg. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"871","DOI":"10.1093\/jjco\/hyaf075","article-title":"Development of a dynamic prediction model with the inclusion of time-dependent inflammatory biomarker enhances recurrence prediction after curative surgery for stage II or III gastric cancer","volume":"55","author":"Aluariachy","year":"2025","journal-title":"Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol."},{"key":"ref_18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Mehboob, A.A., Iqbal, A.G., Butt, T.S., Khan, A.U., and Kazmi, S.Y. (2026). Prognostic Value of Circulating Tumor DNA-Based Minimal Residual Disease for Recurrence-Free Survival in Resectable Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Serial Monitoring Analysis. Dig. Dis. Sci., 1\u201312.","DOI":"10.1007\/s10620-026-10014-8"},{"key":"ref_19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1694","DOI":"10.1007\/s00261-025-05181-7","article-title":"Artificial intelligence in gastric cancer: A systematic review of machine learning and deep learning applications","volume":"51","author":"Alsallal","year":"2026","journal-title":"Abdom. Radiol."}],"container-title":["Current Oncology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/1718-7729\/33\/9\/500\/pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]],"date-time":"2026-08-24T10:45:49Z","timestamp":1787568349000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/1718-7729\/33\/9\/500"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]]},"references-count":19,"journal-issue":{"issue":"9","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9]]}},"alternative-id":["curroncol33090500"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/curroncol33090500","relation":{},"ISSN":["1718-7729"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1718-7729","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,24]]}}}