1.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.
2.Optimizing extraction of microbial DNA from urine: Advancing urinary microbiome research in bladder cancer
Chuang-Ming ZHENG ; Ho Won KANG ; Seongmin MOON ; Young Joon BYUN ; Won Tae KIM ; Yung Hyun CHOI ; Sung-Kwon MOON ; Xuan-Mei PIAO ; Seok Joong YUN
Investigative and Clinical Urology 2025;66(3):272-280
Purpose:
This study aimed to evaluate and optimize microbial DNA extraction methods from urine, a non-invasive sample source, to enhance DNA quality, purity, and reliability for urinary microbiome research and biomarker discovery in bladder cancer.
Materials and Methods:
A total of 302 individuals (258 with genitourinary cancers and 44 with benign urologic diseases) participated in this study. Urine samples were collected via sterile catheterization, resulting in 445 vials for microbial analysis. DNA extraction was performed using three protocols: the standard protocol (SP), water dilution protocol (WDP), and chelation-assisted protocol (CAP). DNA quality (concentration, purity, and contamination levels) was assessed using NanoDrop spectrophotometry.Microbial analysis was conducted on 138 samples (108 cancerous and 30 benign) using 16S rRNA sequencing. Prior to sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform, Victor 3 fluorometry was used for validation.
Results:
WDP outperformed other methods, achieving significantly higher 260/280 and 260/230 ratios, indicating superior DNA purity and reduced contamination, while maintaining reliable DNA yields. CAP was excluded due to poor performance across all metrics. Microbial abundance was significantly higher in WDP-extracted samples (p<0.0001), whereas SP demonstrated higher alpha diversity indices (p<0.01), likely due to improved detection of low-abundance taxa. Beta diversity analysis showed no significant compositional differences between SP and WDP (p=1.0), supporting the reliability of WDP for microbiome research.
Conclusions
WDP is a highly effective and reliable method for microbial DNA extraction from urine, ensuring high-quality and reproducible results. Future research should address sample variability and crystal precipitation to further refine microbiome-based diagnostics and therapeutics.
3.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.
4.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.
5.COL6A1 expression as a potential prognostic biomarker for risk stratification of T1 high grade bladder cancer: Unveiling the aggressive nature of a distinct non-muscle invasive subtype
Kyeong KIM ; Young Joon BYUN ; Chuang-Ming ZHENG ; Sungmin MOON ; Soo Jeong JO ; Ho Won KANG ; Won Tae KIM ; Yung Hyun CHOI ; Sung-Kwon MOON ; Wun-Jae KIM ; Xuan-Mei PIAO ; Seok Joong YUN
Investigative and Clinical Urology 2024;65(1):94-103
Purpose:
T1 high grade (T1HG) bladder cancer (BC) is a type of non-muscle invasive BC (NMIBC) that is recognized as an aggressive subtype with a heightened propensity for progression. Current risk stratification methods for NMIBC rely on clinicopathological indicators; however, these approaches do not adequately capture the aggressive nature of T1HG BC. Thus, new, more accurate biomarkers for T1HG risk stratification are needed. Here, we enrolled three different patient cohorts and investigated expression of collagen type VI alpha 1 (COL6A1), a key component of the extracellular matrix, at different stages and grades of BC, with a specific focus on T1HG BC.
Materials and Methods:
Samples from 298 BC patients were subjected to RNA sequencing and real-time polymerase chain reaction.
Results:
We found that T1HG BC and muscle invasive BC (MIBC) exhibited comparable expression of COL6A1, which was significantly higher than that by other NMIBC subtypes. In particular, T1HG patients who later progressed to MIBC had considerably higher expression of COL6A1 than Ta, T1 low grade patients, and patients that did not progress, highlighting the aggressive nature and higher risk of progression associated with T1HG BC. Moreover, Cox and Kaplan–Meier survival analyses revealed a significant association between elevated expression of COL6A1 and poor progression-free survival of T1HG BC patients (multivariate Cox hazard ratio, 16.812; 95% confidence interval, 3.283–86.095; p=0.001 and p=0.0002 [log-rank test]).
Conclusions
These findings suggest that COL6A1 may be a promising biomarker for risk stratification of T1HG BC, offering valuable insight into disease prognosis and guidance of personalized treatment decisions.
6.Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Among Sutured, Sutureless Scleral Fixation, and Retropupillary Fixation of Intraocular Lens
Ji Eon KANG ; Hye Yeon YOON ; So Hyang CHUNG ; Hyun Seung KIM ; Yong-Soo BYUN
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2024;65(3):203-211
Purpose:
To compare the short-term clinical outcomes (up to 3 months) after three different secondary intraocular lens (IOL) implantations in dislocated and aphakic eyes with insufficient capsular support.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 97 patients who underwent secondary IOL implantation (32 eyes with sutured scleral fixation, 21 with sutureless scleral fixation, and 44 with retropupillary IOL implantation) from March to December 2018. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical equivalent (SE), prediction error (PE), mean absolute error (MAE), surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), ocular residual astigmatism (ORA), and complications in the three groups were assessed before and 1 week and 1 and 3 months after surgery.
Results:
All groups had an improved BCVA beginning 1 month after surgery. The pre- and postoperative SE (p = 0.857, p = 0.263, and p = 0.163) and PE (p = 0.479, p = 0.848, and p = 0.128) did not differ in the sutured scleral fixation, sutureless scleral fixation, and retropupillary IOL implantation groups, respectively; MAE differed significantly among the procedures 1 week after surgery (1.33 ± 1.25, 1.40 ± 1.54, and 0.85 ± 1.25, p = 0.044), but not 1 month after surgery (p = 0.965, p = 0.731). 3 months after surgery, there was no significant difference in SIA (p = 0.140) or ORA (p = 0.178) among the 3 groups. As a complication, intraocular pressure rise occurred more often in the sutured fixated group, while the retropupillary group had a higher dislocation rate.
Conclusions
There was no significant difference in the SE, PE, MAE, SIA, ORA, or complications among the three procedures. Surgical skill is still required to minimize the chance of complications regardless of the implantation method.
7.Performance of a Novel CT-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement to Detect Hemodynamically Significant Coronary Stenosis
Si-Hyuck KANG ; Soo-Hyun KIM ; Sun-Hwa KIM ; Eun Ju CHUN ; Woo-Young CHUNG ; Chang-Hwan YOON ; Sang-Don PARK ; Chang-Wook NAM ; Ki-Hwan KWON ; Joon-Hyung DOH ; Young-Sup BYUN ; Jang-Whan BAE ; Tae-Jin YOUN ; In-Ho CHAE
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2023;38(32):e254-
Background:
Fractional flow reserve (FFR) based on computed tomography (CT) has been shown to better identify ischemia-causing coronary stenosis. However, this current technology requires high computational power, which inhibits its widespread implementation in clinical practice. This prospective, multicenter study aimed at validating the diagnostic performance of a novel simple CT based fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) calculation method in patients with coronary artery disease.
Methods:
Patients who underwent coronary CT angiography (CCTA) within 90 days and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) were prospectively enrolled. A hemodynamically significant lesion was defined as an FFR ≤ 0.80, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was the primary measure. After the planned analysis for the initial algorithm A, we performed another set of exploratory analyses for an improved algorithm B.
Results:
Of 184 patients who agreed to participate in the study, 151 were finally analyzed.Hemodynamically significant lesions were observed in 79 patients (52.3%). The AUC was 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63–0.80) for CCTA, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.56–0.74) for CT-FFR algorithm A (P = 0.866), and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.70–0.86) for algorithm B (P = 0.112). Diagnostic accuracy was 0.63 (0.55–0.71) for CCTA alone, 0.66 (0.58–0.74) for algorithm A, and 0.76 (0.68–0.82) for algorithm B.
Conclusion
This study suggests the feasibility of automated CT-FFR, which can be performed on-site within several hours. However, the diagnostic performance of the current algorithm does not meet the a priori criteria for superiority. Future research is required to improve the accuracy.
8.The Prediction of HER2-Targeted Treatment Response Using 64CuTetra- Azacyclododecanetetra-Acetic Acid (DOTA)-Trastuzumab PET/CT in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Case Report
Inki LEE ; Ilhan LIM ; Byung Hyun BYUN ; Byung Il KIM ; Chang Woon CHOI ; Kyo Chul LEE ; Choong Mo KANG ; Min-Ki SEONG ; Hyun-Ah KIM ; Woo Chul NOH ; Sang Moo LIM
Journal of Breast Cancer 2022;25(1):69-73
A 45-year-old woman diagnosed with breast cancer reported disease progression in the form of metastatic lung and recurrent breast lesions following chemotherapy and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapy. The patient underwent 64 Cu-tetra-azacyclododecanetetra-acetic acid (DOTA)-trastuzumab positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) to evaluate the HER2 expression status.64 Cu-DOTA-trastuzumab accumulated in the left breast and lymph nodes but not in the lung lesions. Following trastuzumab emtansine treatment, there was a significant improvement in the lesions with 64 Cu-DOTA-trastuzumab accumulation. However, the lesions that did not accumulate 64 Cu-DOTA-trastuzumab aggravated. Therefore, it was concluded that 64 CuDOTA-trastuzumab PET/CT can be used to predict the outcome of HER2-targeted treatment by evaluating HER2 expression in breast cancer patients.
9.Loss of EMP2 Inhibits Melanogenesis of MNT1 Melanoma Cells via Regulation of TRP-2
Enkhmend ENKHTAIVAN ; Hyun Ji KIM ; Boram KIM ; Hyung Jung BYUN ; Lu YU ; Tuan Minh NGUYEN ; Thi Ha NGUYEN ; Phuong Anh DO ; Eun Ji KIM ; Kyung Sung KIM ; Hiệu Phùng HUY ; Mostafizur RAHMAN ; Ji Yun JANG ; Seung Bae RHO ; Ho LEE ; Gyeoung Jin KANG ; Mi Kyung PARK ; Nan-Hyung KIM ; Chang Ick CHOI ; Kyeong LEE ; Hyo Kyung HAN ; Jungsook CHO ; Ai Young LEE ; Chang Hoon LEE
Biomolecules & Therapeutics 2022;30(2):203-211
Melanogenesis is the production of melanin from tyrosine by a series of enzyme-catalyzed reactions, in which tyrosinase and DOPA oxidase play key roles. The melanin content in the skin determines skin pigmentation. Abnormalities in skin pigmentation lead to various skin pigmentation disorders. Recent research has shown that the expression of EMP2 is much lower in melanoma than in normal melanocytes, but its role in melanogenesis has not yet been elucidated. Therefore, we investigated the role of EMP2 in the melanogenesis of MNT1 human melanoma cells. We examined TRP-1, TRP-2, and TYR expression levels during melanogenesis in MNT1 melanoma cells by gene silencing of EMP2. Western blot and RT-PCR results confirmed that the expression levels of TYR and TRP-2 were decreased when EMP2 expression was knocked down by EMP2 siRNA in MNT1 cells, and these changes were reversed when EMP2 was overexpressed. We verified the EMP2 gene was knocked out of the cell line (EMP2 CRISPR/Cas9) by using a CRISPR/Cas9 system and found that the expression levels of TRP-2 and TYR were significantly lower in the EMP2 CRISPR/Cas9 cell lines. Loss of EMP2 also reduced migration and invasion of MNT1 melanoma cells. In addition, the melanosome transfer from the melanocytes to keratinocytes in the EMP2 KO cells cocultured with keratinocytes was reduced compared to the cells in the control coculture group. In conclusion, these results suggest that EMP2 is involved in melanogenesis via the regulation of TRP-2 expression.
10.Comparative analysis of imaging diagnostic models for tubular basophilia and mineralization of kidney
Jong Su BYUN ; Ji Hyun LEE ; Jin Seok KANG ; Beom Seok HAN
Laboratory Animal Research 2022;38(3):226-232
Background:
Now that it is possible to efficiently classify and save tissue images of laboratory animals using wholeslide imaging, many diagnostic models are being developed through transfer learning with Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). In this study, transfer learning was performed to gain toxicopathological knowledge using CNN models such as InceptionV3 and Xception. For the classification of tubular basophilia and mineralization, two representative background lesions that commonly occur in toxicological studies, accuracies of diagnosis were compared using MobileNetV2, Xception and InceptionV3. For the simultaneous detection of the two lesions, the accuracy was analysed using You Only Look Once version 4 (YOLOv4).
Results:
The accuracy of the classification models was as follows: MobileNetV2 (epoch 50, accuracy: 98.57%) > Xception (epoch 70, accuracy: 97.47%) > InceptionV3 (epoch 70, accuracy: 89.62%). In the case of object detection, the accuracy of YOLOv4 was 98.62% at epoch 3000.
Conclusions
Among the classification models, MobileNetV2 had the best accuracy despite applying a lower epoch than InceptionV3 and Xception. The object detection model, YOLOv4, accurately and simultaneously diagnosed tubular basophilia and mineralization, with an accuracy of 98.62% at epoch 3000.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail