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.Comparing haploidentical transplantation with post‑transplantation cyclophosphamide and umbilical cord blood transplantation using targeted busulfan in children and adolescents with hematologic malignancies
Kyung Taek HONG ; Bo Kyung KIM ; Hong Yul AN ; Jung Yoon CHOI ; Sang Hoon SONG ; Kyung‑Sang YU ; In‑Jin JANG ; Hyoung Jin KANG
Blood Research 2025;60():7-
Purpose:
This study compared the outcomes of haploidentical-related donor (HRD) and umbilical cord blood (UCB) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies.
Methods:
Data on patients who underwent HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (n = 41) and UCB HSCT (n = 24) after targeted busulfan-based myeloablative conditioning with intensive pharmacokinetic monitoring between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.
Results:
The median follow-up durations in the HRD and UCB groups were 7.0 and 10.9 years, respectively. The cumu‑ lative incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) grades II–IV and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD did not differ significantly between the groups. However, the HRD group demonstrated significantly lower rates of acute GVHD grades III–IV (4.9% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.009) and non-relapse mortality (2.6% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001) but a higher relapse incidence (32.1% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.004) than the UCB group. The 5-year event-free and overall survival rates were 65.8% and 54.2% (p = 0.204) and 78.0% and 65.7% (p = 0.142) for the HRD and UCB groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified disease status as a significant risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 3.24; p = 0.016). Additionally, UCB HSCT exhibited a trend toward worse event-free survival compared to HRD HSCT (hazard ratio, 2.63; p = 0.05).
Conclusions
These findings indicate that HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide provides promising outcomes compared to UCB HSCT in pediatric patients, with a trend toward improved survival over a long-term follow-up period exceeding a median of 7 years. Thus, HRD HSCT may be a valuable option for pediatric patients with‑ out human leukocyte antigen-matched donors.
3.KASL clinical practice guidelines for the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease 2025
Won SOHN ; Young-Sun LEE ; Soon Sun KIM ; Jung Hee KIM ; Young-Joo JIN ; Gi-Ae KIM ; Pil Soo SUNG ; Jeong-Ju YOO ; Young CHANG ; Eun Joo LEE ; Hye Won LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Su Jong YU ; Young Kul JUNG ; Byoung Kuk JANG ;
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(Suppl):S1-S31
4.Comparing haploidentical transplantation with post‑transplantation cyclophosphamide and umbilical cord blood transplantation using targeted busulfan in children and adolescents with hematologic malignancies
Kyung Taek HONG ; Bo Kyung KIM ; Hong Yul AN ; Jung Yoon CHOI ; Sang Hoon SONG ; Kyung‑Sang YU ; In‑Jin JANG ; Hyoung Jin KANG
Blood Research 2025;60():7-
Purpose:
This study compared the outcomes of haploidentical-related donor (HRD) and umbilical cord blood (UCB) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies.
Methods:
Data on patients who underwent HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (n = 41) and UCB HSCT (n = 24) after targeted busulfan-based myeloablative conditioning with intensive pharmacokinetic monitoring between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.
Results:
The median follow-up durations in the HRD and UCB groups were 7.0 and 10.9 years, respectively. The cumu‑ lative incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) grades II–IV and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD did not differ significantly between the groups. However, the HRD group demonstrated significantly lower rates of acute GVHD grades III–IV (4.9% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.009) and non-relapse mortality (2.6% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001) but a higher relapse incidence (32.1% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.004) than the UCB group. The 5-year event-free and overall survival rates were 65.8% and 54.2% (p = 0.204) and 78.0% and 65.7% (p = 0.142) for the HRD and UCB groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified disease status as a significant risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 3.24; p = 0.016). Additionally, UCB HSCT exhibited a trend toward worse event-free survival compared to HRD HSCT (hazard ratio, 2.63; p = 0.05).
Conclusions
These findings indicate that HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide provides promising outcomes compared to UCB HSCT in pediatric patients, with a trend toward improved survival over a long-term follow-up period exceeding a median of 7 years. Thus, HRD HSCT may be a valuable option for pediatric patients with‑ out human leukocyte antigen-matched donors.
5.KASL clinical practice guidelines for the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease 2025
Won SOHN ; Young-Sun LEE ; Soon Sun KIM ; Jung Hee KIM ; Young-Joo JIN ; Gi-Ae KIM ; Pil Soo SUNG ; Jeong-Ju YOO ; Young CHANG ; Eun Joo LEE ; Hye Won LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Su Jong YU ; Young Kul JUNG ; Byoung Kuk JANG ;
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(Suppl):S1-S31
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.Comparing haploidentical transplantation with post‑transplantation cyclophosphamide and umbilical cord blood transplantation using targeted busulfan in children and adolescents with hematologic malignancies
Kyung Taek HONG ; Bo Kyung KIM ; Hong Yul AN ; Jung Yoon CHOI ; Sang Hoon SONG ; Kyung‑Sang YU ; In‑Jin JANG ; Hyoung Jin KANG
Blood Research 2025;60():7-
Purpose:
This study compared the outcomes of haploidentical-related donor (HRD) and umbilical cord blood (UCB) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies.
Methods:
Data on patients who underwent HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (n = 41) and UCB HSCT (n = 24) after targeted busulfan-based myeloablative conditioning with intensive pharmacokinetic monitoring between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.
Results:
The median follow-up durations in the HRD and UCB groups were 7.0 and 10.9 years, respectively. The cumu‑ lative incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) grades II–IV and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD did not differ significantly between the groups. However, the HRD group demonstrated significantly lower rates of acute GVHD grades III–IV (4.9% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.009) and non-relapse mortality (2.6% vs. 34.2%, p < 0.001) but a higher relapse incidence (32.1% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.004) than the UCB group. The 5-year event-free and overall survival rates were 65.8% and 54.2% (p = 0.204) and 78.0% and 65.7% (p = 0.142) for the HRD and UCB groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified disease status as a significant risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 3.24; p = 0.016). Additionally, UCB HSCT exhibited a trend toward worse event-free survival compared to HRD HSCT (hazard ratio, 2.63; p = 0.05).
Conclusions
These findings indicate that HRD HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide provides promising outcomes compared to UCB HSCT in pediatric patients, with a trend toward improved survival over a long-term follow-up period exceeding a median of 7 years. Thus, HRD HSCT may be a valuable option for pediatric patients with‑ out human leukocyte antigen-matched donors.
8.KASL clinical practice guidelines for the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease 2025
Won SOHN ; Young-Sun LEE ; Soon Sun KIM ; Jung Hee KIM ; Young-Joo JIN ; Gi-Ae KIM ; Pil Soo SUNG ; Jeong-Ju YOO ; Young CHANG ; Eun Joo LEE ; Hye Won LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Su Jong YU ; Young Kul JUNG ; Byoung Kuk JANG ;
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2025;31(Suppl):S1-S31
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.The impact of severe depression on the survival of older patients with end-stage kidney disease
You Hyun JEON ; Jeong-Hoon LIM ; Yena JEON ; Yu-Kyung CHUNG ; Yon Su KIM ; Shin-Wook KANG ; Chul Woo YANG ; Nam-Ho KIM ; Hee-Yeon JUNG ; Ji-Young CHOI ; Sun-Hee PARK ; Chan-Duck KIM ; Yong-Lim KIM ; Jang-Hee CHO
Kidney Research and Clinical Practice 2024;43(6):818-828
Incidence of depression increases in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). We evaluated the association between depression and mortality among older patients with ESKD, which has not been studied previously. Methods: This nationwide prospective cohort study included 487 patients with ESKD aged >65 years, who were categorized into minimal, mild-to-moderate, and severe depression groups based on their Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) scores. Predisposing factors for high BDI-II scores and the association between the scores and survival were analyzed. Results: The severe depression group showed a higher modified Charlson comorbidity index value and lower serum albumin, phosphate, and uric acid levels than the other depression groups. The Kaplan-Meier curve revealed a significantly lower survival in the severe depression group than in the minimal and mild-to-moderate depression groups (p = 0.011). Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed that severe depression was an independent risk factor for mortality in the study cohort (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–1.91; p = 0.041). Additionally, BDI-II scores were associated with modified Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.009) and serum albumin level (p = 0.004) in multivariate linear regression. Among the three depressive symptoms, higher somatic symptom scores were associated with increased mortality. Conclusion: Severe depression among older patients with ESKD increases mortality compared with minimal or mild-to-moderate depression, and patients with concomitant somatic symptoms require careful management of their comorbidities and nutritional status.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail