1.Zinc Finger Protein 639 Expression Is a Novel Prognostic Determinant in Breast Cancer
Fang LEE ; Shih-Ping CHENG ; Ming-Jen CHEN ; Wen-Chien HUANG ; Yi-Min LIU ; Shao-Chiang CHANG ; Yuan-Ching CHANG
Journal of Breast Cancer 2025;28(2):86-98
Purpose:
Zinc finger protein 639 (ZNF639) is often found within the overlapping amplicon of PIK3CA, and previous studies suggest its involvement in the pathogenesis of esophageal and oral squamous cell carcinomas. However, its expression and significance in breast cancer remain uncharacterized.
Methods:
Immunohistochemical analysis of ZNF639 was performed using tissue microarrays.Functional studies, including colony formation, Transwell cell migration, and in vivo metastasis, were conducted on breast tumor cells with ZNF639 knockdown via small interfering RNA transfection.
Results:
Reduced ZNF639 immunoreactivity was observed in 82% of the breast cancer samples, independent of hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. In multivariate Cox regression analyses, ZNF639 expression was associated with favorable survival outcomes, including recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14–0.89) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16– 1.05). ZNF639 knockdown increased clonogenicity, cell motility, and lung metastasis in NOD/ SCID mice. Following the ZNF639 knockdown, the expression of Snail1, vimentin, and C-C chemokine ligand 20 (CCL20) was upregulated, and the changes in cell phenotype mediated by ZNF639 were reversed by the subsequent knockdown of CCL20.
Conclusion
Low ZNF639 expression is a novel prognostic factor for recurrence-free survival in patients with breast cancer.
2.Historical Perspectives of the Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery: Sung Nok Hong (1927–2017) Who Performed the First Coronary Artery Bypass Graft in Korea
Doo Yun LEE ; Hyo Chae PAIK ; Byung Chul CHANG ; Meyun-Shick KANG ; Kook-Yang PARK
Journal of Chest Surgery 2025;58(2):73-76
3.Safety and Tolerability of Wharton’s Jelly-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Patients With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Phase 1 Clinical Study
Jiwon LEE ; Sang Eon PARK ; Mira KIM ; Hyeongseop KIM ; Jeong-Yi KWON ; Hong Bae JEON ; Jong Wook CHANG ; Jeehun LEE
Journal of Clinical Neurology 2025;21(1):40-52
Background:
and Purpose This study was an open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 clinical trial to determine the safety and dose of EN001 for patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). EN001, developed by ENCell, are allogeneic early-passage Wharton’s jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells that originate at the umbilical cord, with preclinical studies demonstrating their high therapeutic efficacy for DMD.
Methods:
This phase 1 clinical trial explored the safety and tolerability of EN001 as a potential treatment option for patients with DMD. Six pediatric participants with DMD were divided into two subgroups of equal size: low-dose EN001 (5.0×105 cells/kg) and high-dose EN001 (2.5×106 cells/kg). All participants were monitored for 12 weeks after EN001 administration to assess its safety. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was evaluated across 2 weeks post administration. Exploratory efficacy was evaluated by measuring serum creatine kinase levels, and functional evaluations—including spirometry, myometry, the North Star Ambulatory Assessment, and the 6-minute walk test—were conducted at week 12 and compared with the baseline values.
Results:
No participants experienced serious adverse events related to EN001 injection during the 12-week follow-up period. Mild adverse events included injection-related local erythema, edema, parosmia, and headache, but DLT was not observed. Functional evaluations at week 12 revealed no significant changes from baseline.
Conclusions
These results demonstrated that EN001 are safe and well tolerated for patients with DMD, and did not cause serious adverse events. The efficacy of EN001 could be confirmed through larger-scale future studies that incorporate repeated dosing and have a randomized controlled trial design.
4.Significant miRNAs as Potential Biomarkers to Differentiate Moyamoya Disease From Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease
Hyesun LEE ; Mina HWANG ; Hyuk Sung KWON ; Young Seo KIM ; Hyun Young KIM ; Soo JEONG ; Kyung Chul NOH ; Hye-Yeon CHOI ; Ho Geol WOO ; Sung Hyuk HEO ; Seong-Ho KOH ; Dae-Il CHANG
Journal of Clinical Neurology 2025;21(2):146-149
5.Erratum: Korean Gastric Cancer Association-Led Nationwide Survey on Surgically Treated Gastric Cancers in 2023
Dong Jin KIM ; Jeong Ho SONG ; Ji-Hyeon PARK ; Sojung KIM ; Sin Hye PARK ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Kyunghye BANG ; Chung-sik GONG ; Sung Eun OH ; Yoo Min KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeesun KIM ; Ji Eun JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Ki Bum PARK ; Jae Hun CHUNG ; Sang-Il LEE ; Young-Gil SON ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Sang Hyuk SEO ; Sejin LEE ; Won Jun SEO ; Dong Jin PARK ; Yoonhong KIM ; Jin-Jo KIM ; Ki Bum PARK ; In CHO ; Hye Seong AHN ; Sung Jin OH ; Ju-Hee LEE ; Hayemin LEE ; Seong Chan GONG ; Changin CHOI ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Eun Young KIM ; Chang Min LEE ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Seung Jong OH ; Eunju LEE ; Seong-A JEONG ; Jung-Min BAE ; Jae-Seok MIN ; Hyun-dong CHAE ; Sung Gon KIM ; Daegeun PARK ; Dong Baek KANG ; Hogoon KIM ; Seung Soo LEE ; Sung Il CHOI ; Seong Ho HWANG ; Su-Mi KIM ; Moon Soo LEE ; Sang Hyun KIM ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Yusung YANG ; Yonghae BAIK ; Sang Soo EOM ; Inho JEONG ; Yoon Ju JUNG ; Jong-Min PARK ; Jin Won LEE ; Jungjai PARK ; Ki Han KIM ; Kyung-Goo LEE ; Jeongyeon LEE ; Seongil OH ; Ji Hun PARK ; Jong Won KIM ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):400-402
6.Discordance in Claudin 18.2Expression Between Primary and Metastatic Lesions in Patients With Gastric Cancer
Seung-Myoung SON ; Chang Gok WOO ; Ok-Jun LEE ; Sun Kyung LEE ; Minkwan CHO ; Yong-Pyo LEE ; Hongsik KIM ; Hee Kyung KIM ; Yaewon YANG ; Jihyun KWON ; Ki Hyeong LEE ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Hyo Yung YUN ; Hye Sook HAN
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):303-317
Purpose:
Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) has emerged as a promising therapeutic target for CLDN18.2-expressing gastric cancer (GC). We sought to examine the heterogeneity of CLDN18.2 expression between primary GC (PGC) and metastatic GC (MGC) using various scoring methods.
Materials and Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed data from 102 patients with pathologically confirmed paired primary and metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. CLDN18.2 expression was evaluated through immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed CLDN18.2 positivity using multiple scoring approaches, including the immunoreactivity score, H-score, and the percentage of tumor cells showing moderate-to-strong staining intensity. We analyzed the concordance rates between PGC and MGC and the association of CLDN18.2 positivity with clinicopathological features.
Results:
CLDN18.2 positivity varied from 25% to 65% depending on the scoring method, with PGC consistently showing higher expression levels than MGC. Intratumoral heterogeneity was noted in 25.5% of PGCs and 19.6% of MGCs. Intertumoral heterogeneity, manifesting as discordance in CLDN18.2 positivity between PGC and MGC, was observed in about 20% of cases, with moderate agreement across scoring methods (κ=0.47 to 0.60).In PGC, higher CLDN18.2 positivity correlated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, poorly differentiated grade, and biopsy specimens. In MGC, positivity was associated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, and metastatic peritoneal tissues.
Conclusions
CLDN18.2 expression demonstrates significant heterogeneity between PGC and MGC, with a 20% discordance rate. Comprehensive tissue sampling and reassessment of CLDN18.2 status are crucial, especially before initiating CLDN18.2-targeted therapies.
7.Pulmonary Tumor Thrombotic Microangiopathy Associated With Gastric Cancer: Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes
Tae-Se KIM ; Soomin AHN ; Sung-A CHANG ; Sung Hee LIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Yang Won MIN ; Hyuk LEE ; Poong-Lyul RHEE ; Jae J. KIM ; Jun Haeng LEE
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):276-284
Purpose:
Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) is a fatal complication of gastric cancer (GC). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics, outcomes, and immunohistochemical profiles of patients with GC-induced PTTM.
Materials and Methods:
From 2011 to 2023, 8 patients were clinically diagnosed with PTTM associated with GC antemortem. Clinical features and outcomes were reviewed, and immunohistochemical staining for c-erbB-2, MutL protein homolog 1, and programmed cell death ligand-1 was performed.
Results:
The median patient age was 56 years (range, 34–66 years). In all the patients, the tumors exhibited either ulceroinfiltrative or diffusely infiltrative gross morphology.The median tumor size was 5.8 cm (range, 2.0 cm–15.0 cm). Poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma was the most common histological type (6/8, 75%), followed by signet ring cell carcinoma (1/8, 12.5%) and moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (1/8, 12.5%).Chest computed tomography revealed ground-glass opacities (7/8, 87.5%) or tree-in-bud signs (2/8, 25.0%) without definite evidence of pulmonary thromboembolism. Disseminated intravascular coagulation was present in 62.5% (5/8) of the patients diagnosed with PTTM.C-erbB-2 was positive in one patient (1/8, 12.5%). One patient who received palliative chemotherapy after developing PTTM survived for 35 days, whereas the other 7 patients who did not receive chemotherapy after developing PTTM survived for 7 days or less after PTTM diagnosis.
Conclusions
Most patients with GC-induced PTTM had an undifferentiated-type histology, infiltrative morphology, and extremely poor survival. Palliative chemotherapy may benefit patients with GC-induced PTTM; however, further studies are needed to explore the potential of targeted therapy in these patients.
8.Korean Gastric Cancer AssociationLed Nationwide Survey on Surgically Treated Gastric Cancers in 2023
Dong Jin KIM ; Jeong Ho SONG ; Ji-Hyeon PARK ; Sojung KIM ; Sin Hye PARK ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Kyunghye BANG ; Chung-sik GONG ; Sung Eun OH ; Yoo Min KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeesun KIM ; Ji Eun JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Ki Bum PARK ; Jae Hun CHUNG ; Sang-Il LEE ; Young-Gil SON ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Sang Hyuk SEO ; Sejin LEE ; Won Jun SEO ; Dong Jin PARK ; Yoonhong KIM ; Jin-Jo KIM ; Ki Bum PARK ; In CHO ; Hye Seong AHN ; Sung Jin OH ; Ju-Hee LEE ; Hayemin LEE ; Seong Chan GONG ; Changin CHOI ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Eun Young KIM ; Chang Min LEE ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Seung Jong OH ; Eunju LEE ; Seong-A JEONG ; Jung-Min BAE ; Jae-Seok MIN ; Hyun-dong CHAE ; Sung Gon KIM ; Daegeun PARK ; Dong Baek KANG ; Hogoon KIM ; Seung Soo LEE ; Sung Il CHOI ; Seong Ho HWANG ; Su-Mi KIM ; Moon Soo LEE ; Sang Hyun KIM ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Yusung YANG ; Yonghae BAIK ; Sang Soo EOM ; Inho JEONG ; Yoon Ju JUNG ; Jong-Min PARK ; Jin Won LEE ; Jungjai PARK ; Ki Han KIM ; Kyung-Goo LEE ; Jeongyeon LEE ; Seongil OH ; Ji Hun PARK ; Jong Won KIM ; The Information Committee of the Korean Gastric Cancer Association
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):115-132
Purpose:
Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023.
Materials and Methods:
The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys.
Results:
Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively.
Conclusions
The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.
9.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
10.Clinical practice guidelines for ovarian cancer: an update to the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology guidelines
Banghyun LEE ; Suk-Joon CHANG ; Byung Su KWON ; Joo-Hyuk SON ; Myong Cheol LIM ; Yun Hwan KIM ; Shin-Wha LEE ; Chel Hun CHOI ; Kyung Jin EOH ; Jung-Yun LEE ; Yoo-Young LEE ; Dong Hoon SUH ; Yong Beom KIM
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 2025;36(1):e69-
We updated the Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology (KSGO) practice guideline for the management of ovarian cancer as version 5.1. The ovarian cancer guideline team of the KSGO published announced the fifth version (version 5.0) of its clinical practice guidelines for the management of ovarian cancer in December 2023. In version 5.0, the selection of the key questions and the systematic reviews were based on the data available up to December 2022.Therefore, we updated the guidelines version 5.0 with newly accumulated clinical data and added 5 new key questions reflecting the latest insights in the field of ovarian cancer between 2023 and 2024. For each question, recommendation was provided together with corresponding level of evidence and grade of recommendation, all established through expert consensus.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail