BVA decisions by condition
Stomach neoplasm: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a stomach neoplasm issue in 602 decisions. It granted the stomach neoplasm issue in 7.1% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 37.4%, and remanded it in 52.8%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 16.0% were granted.
Decisions
602
2017–2026
Granted
7.1%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
16.0%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
52.8%
Denied: 37.4%
Stomach neoplasm outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 80 | 2.5% | 43.8% | 48.8% | 5.0% |
| 2019 | 82 | 3.7% | 39.0% | 54.9% | 2.4% |
| 2020 | 69 | 11.6% | 34.8% | 52.2% | 1.4% |
| 2021 | 56 | 3.6% | 26.8% | 67.9% | 1.8% |
| 2022 | 62 | 14.5% | 27.4% | 51.6% | 6.5% |
| 2023 | 73 | 5.5% | 35.6% | 58.9% | 0.0% |
| 2024 | 62 | 8.1% | 35.5% | 53.2% | 3.2% |
| 2025 | 67 | 9.0% | 47.8% | 41.8% | 1.5% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied stomach neoplasm decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the stomach neoplasm issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 76 | 52.1% | 8.2% | +43.9 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 156 | 36.6% | 7.0% | +29.6 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 40 | 35.0% | 14.5% | +20.5 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 120 | 28.9% | 13.9% | +15.0 pts |
| Combat service | 40 | 14.3% | 16.1% | −1.9 pts |
| Lay statement | 455 | 11.0% | 38.0% | −27.0 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 72.1% of the decisions that granted stomach neoplasm.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 14.0% of grants and 8.0% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often stomach neoplasm was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 283 | 14.2% | 18.1% | −3.9 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 394 | 13.7% | 22.5% | −8.8 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied stomach neoplasm
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established4
- Caused by the service-connected disability3
- Service connection established2
- Service records negative or silent2
- Presumed herbicide exposure in vietnam2
Most common reasons in denials
- No current diagnosis58
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim31
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis18
- Current diagnosis established17
- Service records negative or silent16
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service8
- Criteria for service connection not met6
- Veteran not competent to provide diagnosis4
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent stomach neoplasm decisions
Granted
Current diagnosis confirmed; Presumed exposure at Camp Lejeune; Private medical opinion found highly probative
Favorable findings from prior decision regarding diagnosis and CLCW exposure; Private medical opinions support nexus to CLCW; September 2025 opinion found tumor likely caused by Benzene, TCE, vinyl chloride
Prior reduction improper due to inadequate examination.; Outdated PFT results used for reduction.; Evidence did not show improvement in ability to function.
Denied
No in-service onset or treatment for stomach disability; VA examiner found GERD not related to service or TERA; Obesity noted as risk factor
No current diagnosis of a stomach condition.; Symptoms did not demonstrate functional impairment of earning capacity.; Symptoms attributed to existing service-connected disabilities.
Evidence persuasively weighs against current stomach disability; No in-service nexus established; Lack of documentation in medical records
Rules that apply to stomach neoplasm claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your stomach neoplasm case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a stomach neoplasm issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.