1.Molecular determinants of outcome to gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer
Daeseong KIM ; Nam Suk SIM ; Seonjeong WOO ; Min Hwan KIM ; Choong-kun LEE ; Seung Soo HONG ; Sung Hyun KIM ; Ho Kyoung HWANG ; Chang Moo KANG ; Woo Jung LEE ; Jung Hyun JO ; Taek CHUNG ; Sohyun HWANG ; Beodeul KANG ; Jung Sun KIM ; Chang-Il KWON ; Sangwoo KIM ; Hong Jae CHON ; Chang Gon KIM ; Young Nyun PARK ; Hye Jin CHOI
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2026;32(2):721-736
Background/Aims:
Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare malignancy with poor prognosis. We investigated genomic determinants of clinical benefit from gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel (GAP) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in advanced BTC.
Methods:
Clinical and genomic data using TruSight Oncology 500 were analyzed from patients treated with GAP (N=198) or GC (N=89) as first-line therapy.
Results:
With a median follow-up of 33.0 months, GAP modestly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.764; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.591–0.989) without significant overall survival (OS) difference compared to GC. Genomic profiling revealed frequent alterations in TP53 (35.2%), KRAS (16.4%), SMAD4 (10.5%), and TNFRSF14 (10.5%), involving RTK/RAS (44.3%), TP53 (41.8%), and PI3K (20.2%) pathways. Single-gene mutations did not predict treatment benefit. However, pathway-level analysis identified PI3K pathway activation as significantly associated with inferior PFS (HR 2.148; 95% CI 1.478–3.124) and OS (HR 2.096; 95% CI 1.413–3.109) in patients receiving GAP, an effect not observed with GC. Importantly, GAP conferred clinical benefit only in patients without PI3K pathway activation, while no survival advantage was seen in those with such alterations (Pinteraction=0.023 for PFS, Pinteraction=0.003 for OS). Similar results were obtained in the independent validation cohort treated with GAP (N=103) or GC (N=64) for BTC.
Conclusions
Genomic profiling using next-generation sequencing identified PI3K pathway activation as key molecular determinant that differentiates patient outcomes between GAP and GC treatments in advanced BTC.
2.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.
3.Pharmacological Treatment of Oral Lichen Planus: A Review of Evaluated Therapeutics
Kun-Hwa KANG ; Ji-Rak KIM ; Jae-Kwang JUNG ; Jin-Seok BYUN
Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain 2025;50(1):6-15
Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory disease, affecting approximately 0.5% to 2% of the global population. OLP can lead to long-term oral pain, reduced quality of life, with the potential for malignant transformation. Current treatment strategies focus on symptom management and reducing the risk of malignancy. Treatment of OLP is challenging and varies from patient to patient, especially in those who do not respond to corticosteroids. The effectiveness and safety of second-line and third-line treatment options in such cases are continually compared and evaluated, and recently, the application of Janus kinase inhibitors, micro ribonucleic acids, and mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies is being assessed. As a result, the ability of clinicians to select the most appropriate treatment modalities for each patient remains crucial. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy of recent treatment modalities and key considerations to assist clinicians in selecting effective and safe treatment strategies for OLP.
4.Therapeutic Effects of Intravitreal Methotrexate Injection for Intraocular Lymphoma Diagnosed Using Immunocytochemical Staining
Yong Jin NA ; Kun Young KWON ; Kook Young KIM ; Young Suk CHANG ; Jung Tae KIM
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2025;66(2):101-113
Purpose:
This study evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of intravitreal methotrexate (MTX) injections in patients diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma via vitrectomy and immunocytochemical staining.
Methods:
In a retrospective analysis of medical records, we reviewed data from four patients (six eyes) diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma cytologically after undergoing vitrectomy at our hospital between December 2021 and December 2023. Each case was followed for a minimum of 6 months after treatment, with comparisons made between pre- and post-treatment observations
Results:
The mean age of the patients was 63.5 ± 9.8 years, with an average interval of 29.3 ± 32.0 months from initial symptom onset to intraocular lymphoma diagnosis. Diagnosis was confirmed through cytological and immunocytochemical analysis of vitreous specimens, identifying diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in four eyes and atypical lymphoid cells in two eyes. On average, 14.0 ± 1.7 intravitreal MTX injections were administered per eye. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improved from 1.18 ± 0.90 pre-treatment to 0.37 ± 0.70 post-treatment. Ophthalmic complications included toxic keratopathy in three eyes and retinal hemorrhage in one eye. Additionally, nasal cavity lymphoma was diagnosed in two patients.
Conclusions
Diagnostic vitrectomy combined with cytology and immunocytochemical staining is essential for the early diagnosis of intraocular lymphoma and differentiation from inflammatory diseases, such as uveitis. Intravitreal MTX injections can induce clinical remission in intraocular lymphoma cases.
6.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.
7.Therapeutic Effects of Intravitreal Methotrexate Injection for Intraocular Lymphoma Diagnosed Using Immunocytochemical Staining
Yong Jin NA ; Kun Young KWON ; Kook Young KIM ; Young Suk CHANG ; Jung Tae KIM
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2025;66(2):101-113
Purpose:
This study evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of intravitreal methotrexate (MTX) injections in patients diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma via vitrectomy and immunocytochemical staining.
Methods:
In a retrospective analysis of medical records, we reviewed data from four patients (six eyes) diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma cytologically after undergoing vitrectomy at our hospital between December 2021 and December 2023. Each case was followed for a minimum of 6 months after treatment, with comparisons made between pre- and post-treatment observations
Results:
The mean age of the patients was 63.5 ± 9.8 years, with an average interval of 29.3 ± 32.0 months from initial symptom onset to intraocular lymphoma diagnosis. Diagnosis was confirmed through cytological and immunocytochemical analysis of vitreous specimens, identifying diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in four eyes and atypical lymphoid cells in two eyes. On average, 14.0 ± 1.7 intravitreal MTX injections were administered per eye. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improved from 1.18 ± 0.90 pre-treatment to 0.37 ± 0.70 post-treatment. Ophthalmic complications included toxic keratopathy in three eyes and retinal hemorrhage in one eye. Additionally, nasal cavity lymphoma was diagnosed in two patients.
Conclusions
Diagnostic vitrectomy combined with cytology and immunocytochemical staining is essential for the early diagnosis of intraocular lymphoma and differentiation from inflammatory diseases, such as uveitis. Intravitreal MTX injections can induce clinical remission in intraocular lymphoma cases.
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.Therapeutic Effects of Intravitreal Methotrexate Injection for Intraocular Lymphoma Diagnosed Using Immunocytochemical Staining
Yong Jin NA ; Kun Young KWON ; Kook Young KIM ; Young Suk CHANG ; Jung Tae KIM
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2025;66(2):101-113
Purpose:
This study evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of intravitreal methotrexate (MTX) injections in patients diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma via vitrectomy and immunocytochemical staining.
Methods:
In a retrospective analysis of medical records, we reviewed data from four patients (six eyes) diagnosed with intraocular lymphoma cytologically after undergoing vitrectomy at our hospital between December 2021 and December 2023. Each case was followed for a minimum of 6 months after treatment, with comparisons made between pre- and post-treatment observations
Results:
The mean age of the patients was 63.5 ± 9.8 years, with an average interval of 29.3 ± 32.0 months from initial symptom onset to intraocular lymphoma diagnosis. Diagnosis was confirmed through cytological and immunocytochemical analysis of vitreous specimens, identifying diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in four eyes and atypical lymphoid cells in two eyes. On average, 14.0 ± 1.7 intravitreal MTX injections were administered per eye. The mean best-corrected visual acuity improved from 1.18 ± 0.90 pre-treatment to 0.37 ± 0.70 post-treatment. Ophthalmic complications included toxic keratopathy in three eyes and retinal hemorrhage in one eye. Additionally, nasal cavity lymphoma was diagnosed in two patients.
Conclusions
Diagnostic vitrectomy combined with cytology and immunocytochemical staining is essential for the early diagnosis of intraocular lymphoma and differentiation from inflammatory diseases, such as uveitis. Intravitreal MTX injections can induce clinical remission in intraocular lymphoma cases.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail