1.Prognostic Evaluation and Survival Prediction for Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma Following Hepatectomy
Seok-Joo CHUN ; Yu Jung JUNG ; YoungRok CHOI ; Nam-Joon YI ; Kwang-Woong LEE ; Kyung-Suk SUH ; Kyoung Bun LEE ; Hyun-Cheol KANG ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Kyung Su KIM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):229-239
Purpose:
This study aimed to assess prognostic factors associated with combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and to predict 5-year survival based on these factors.
Materials and Methods:
Patients who underwent definitive hepatectomy from 2006 to 2022 at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria involved a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of cHCC-CCA.
Results:
A total of 80 patients with diagnosed cHCC-CCA were included in the analysis. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 months, while distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), hepatic progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were 50.8, 21.5, and 85.1 months, respectively. In 52 cases of recurrence, intrahepatic recurrence was the most common initial recurrence (34/52), with distant metastasis in 17 cases. Factors associated with poor DMFS included tumor necrosis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and histologic compact type. Postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9, tumor necrosis, LVI, and close/positive margin were associated with poor OS. LVI emerged as a key factor affecting both DMFS and OS, with a 5-year OS of 93.3% for patients without LVI compared to 35.8% with LVI. Based on these factors, a nomogram predicting 3-year and 5-year DMFS and OS was developed, demonstrating high concordance with actual survival in the cohort (Harrell C-index 0.809 for OS, 0.801 for DMFS, respectively).
Conclusion
The prognosis of cHCC-CCA is notably poor when combined with LVI. Given the significant impact of adverse features, accurate outcome prediction is crucial. Moreover, consideration of adjuvant therapy may be warranted for patients exhibiting poor survival and increased risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis.
2.Prognostic Evaluation and Survival Prediction for Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma Following Hepatectomy
Seok-Joo CHUN ; Yu Jung JUNG ; YoungRok CHOI ; Nam-Joon YI ; Kwang-Woong LEE ; Kyung-Suk SUH ; Kyoung Bun LEE ; Hyun-Cheol KANG ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Kyung Su KIM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):229-239
Purpose:
This study aimed to assess prognostic factors associated with combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and to predict 5-year survival based on these factors.
Materials and Methods:
Patients who underwent definitive hepatectomy from 2006 to 2022 at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria involved a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of cHCC-CCA.
Results:
A total of 80 patients with diagnosed cHCC-CCA were included in the analysis. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 months, while distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), hepatic progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were 50.8, 21.5, and 85.1 months, respectively. In 52 cases of recurrence, intrahepatic recurrence was the most common initial recurrence (34/52), with distant metastasis in 17 cases. Factors associated with poor DMFS included tumor necrosis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and histologic compact type. Postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9, tumor necrosis, LVI, and close/positive margin were associated with poor OS. LVI emerged as a key factor affecting both DMFS and OS, with a 5-year OS of 93.3% for patients without LVI compared to 35.8% with LVI. Based on these factors, a nomogram predicting 3-year and 5-year DMFS and OS was developed, demonstrating high concordance with actual survival in the cohort (Harrell C-index 0.809 for OS, 0.801 for DMFS, respectively).
Conclusion
The prognosis of cHCC-CCA is notably poor when combined with LVI. Given the significant impact of adverse features, accurate outcome prediction is crucial. Moreover, consideration of adjuvant therapy may be warranted for patients exhibiting poor survival and increased risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis.
3.Prognostic Evaluation and Survival Prediction for Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma Following Hepatectomy
Seok-Joo CHUN ; Yu Jung JUNG ; YoungRok CHOI ; Nam-Joon YI ; Kwang-Woong LEE ; Kyung-Suk SUH ; Kyoung Bun LEE ; Hyun-Cheol KANG ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Kyung Su KIM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):229-239
Purpose:
This study aimed to assess prognostic factors associated with combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and to predict 5-year survival based on these factors.
Materials and Methods:
Patients who underwent definitive hepatectomy from 2006 to 2022 at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria involved a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of cHCC-CCA.
Results:
A total of 80 patients with diagnosed cHCC-CCA were included in the analysis. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 months, while distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), hepatic progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were 50.8, 21.5, and 85.1 months, respectively. In 52 cases of recurrence, intrahepatic recurrence was the most common initial recurrence (34/52), with distant metastasis in 17 cases. Factors associated with poor DMFS included tumor necrosis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and histologic compact type. Postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9, tumor necrosis, LVI, and close/positive margin were associated with poor OS. LVI emerged as a key factor affecting both DMFS and OS, with a 5-year OS of 93.3% for patients without LVI compared to 35.8% with LVI. Based on these factors, a nomogram predicting 3-year and 5-year DMFS and OS was developed, demonstrating high concordance with actual survival in the cohort (Harrell C-index 0.809 for OS, 0.801 for DMFS, respectively).
Conclusion
The prognosis of cHCC-CCA is notably poor when combined with LVI. Given the significant impact of adverse features, accurate outcome prediction is crucial. Moreover, consideration of adjuvant therapy may be warranted for patients exhibiting poor survival and increased risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis.
4.Practice guidelines for managing extrahepatic biliary tract cancers
Hyung Sun KIM ; Mee Joo KANG ; Jingu KANG ; Kyubo KIM ; Bohyun KIM ; Seong-Hun KIM ; Soo Jin KIM ; Yong-Il KIM ; Joo Young KIM ; Jin Sil KIM ; Haeryoung KIM ; Hyo Jung KIM ; Ji Hae NAHM ; Won Suk PARK ; Eunkyu PARK ; Joo Kyung PARK ; Jin Myung PARK ; Byeong Jun SONG ; Yong Chan SHIN ; Keun Soo AHN ; Sang Myung WOO ; Jeong Il YU ; Changhoon YOO ; Kyoungbun LEE ; Dong Ho LEE ; Myung Ah LEE ; Seung Eun LEE ; Ik Jae LEE ; Huisong LEE ; Jung Ho IM ; Kee-Taek JANG ; Hye Young JANG ; Sun-Young JUN ; Hong Jae CHON ; Min Kyu JUNG ; Yong Eun CHUNG ; Jae Uk CHONG ; Eunae CHO ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Sae Byeol CHOI ; Seo-Yeon CHOI ; Seong Ji CHOI ; Joon Young CHOI ; Hye-Jeong CHOI ; Seung-Mo HONG ; Ji Hyung HONG ; Tae Ho HONG ; Shin Hye HWANG ; In Gyu HWANG ; Joon Seong PARK
Annals of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery 2024;28(2):161-202
Background:
s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021.
Methods:
Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop.
Results:
In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing.
Conclusions
The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.
5.Prognostic Significance of Bulky Nodal Disease in Anal Cancer Management: A Multi-institutional Study
Seok-Joo CHUN ; Eunji KIM ; Won Il JANG ; Mi-Sook KIM ; Hyun-Cheol KANG ; Byoung Hyuck KIM ; Eui Kyu CHIE
Cancer Research and Treatment 2024;56(4):1197-1206
Purpose:
This study aimed to assess the prognostic significance of bulky nodal involvement in patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy.
Materials and Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed medical records of patients diagnosed with anal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent definitive chemoradiotherapy at three medical centers between 2004 and 2021. Exclusion criteria included distant metastasis at diagnosis, 2D radiotherapy, and salvage treatment for local relapse. Bulky N+ was defined as nodes with a long diameter of 2 cm or greater.
Results:
A total of 104 patients were included, comprising 51 with N0, 46 with non-bulky N+, and seven with bulky N+. The median follow-up duration was 54.0 months (range, 6.4 to 162.2 months). Estimated 5-year progression-free survival (PFS), loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), and overall survival (OS) rates for patients with bulky N+ were 42.9%, 42.9%, and 47.6%, respectively. Bulky N+ was significantly associated with inferior PFS, LRRFS, and OS compared to patients without or with non-bulky N+, even after multivariate analysis. We proposed a new staging system incorporating bulky N+ as N2 category, with estimated 5-year LRRFS, PFS, and OS rates of 81.1%, 80.6%, and 86.2% for stage I, 67.7%, 60.9%, and 93.3% for stage II, and 42.9%, 42.9%, and 47.6% for stage III disease, enhancing the predictability of prognosis.
Conclusion
Patients with bulky nodal disease treated with standard chemoradiotherapy experienced poor survival outcomes, indicating the potential necessity for further treatment intensification.
6.Development of the Korea-Polyenvironmental Risk Score for Psychosis
Eun-Jin JEON ; Shi-Hyun KANG ; Yan-Hong PIAO ; Sung-Wan KIM ; Jung-Jin KIM ; Bong-Ju LEE ; Je-Chun YU ; Kyu-Young LEE ; Seung-Hee WON ; Seung-Hwan LEE ; Seung-Hyun KIM ; Eui-Tae KIM ; Clara Tammy KIM ; Dominic OLIVER ; Paolo FUSAR-POLI ; Fatima Zahra RAMI ; Young-Chul CHUNG
Psychiatry Investigation 2022;19(3):197-206
Objective:
Comprehensive understanding of polyenvironmental risk factors for the development of psychosis is important. Based on a review of related evidence, we developed the Korea Polyenvironmental Risk Score (K-PERS) for psychosis. We investigated whether the K-PERS can differentiate patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) from healthy controls (HCs).
Methods:
We reviewed existing tools for measuring polyenvironmental risk factors for psychosis, including the Maudsley Environmental Risk Score (ERS), polyenviromic risk score (PERS), and Psychosis Polyrisk Score (PPS). Using odds ratios and relative risks for Western studies and the “population proportion” (PP) of risk factors for Korean data, we developed the K-PERS, and compared the scores thereon between patients with SSDs and HCs. In addition, correlation was performed between the K-PERS and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).
Results:
We first constructed the “K-PERS-I,” comprising five factors based on the PPS, and then the “K-PERS-II” comprising six factors based on the ERS. The instruments accurately predicted participants’ status (case vs. control). In addition, the K-PERS-I and -II scores exhibited significant negative correlations with the negative symptom factor score of the PANSS.
Conclusion
The K-PERS is the first comprehensive tool developed based on PP data obtained from Korean studies that measures polyenvironmental risk factors for psychosis. Using pilot data, the K-PERS predicted patient status (SSD vs. HC). Further research is warranted to examine the relationship of K-PERS scores with clinical outcomes of psychosis and schizophrenia.
7.Oncologic outcomes according to the location and status of resection margin in pancreas head cancer: role of radiation therapy in R1 resection
Hee Ju SOHN ; Hongbeom KIM ; Sun Joo KIM ; Kyung Bun LEE ; Youngmin HAN ; Jung Min LEE ; Jae Seung KANG ; Wooil KWON ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Haeryoung KIM ; Jin-Young JANG
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2022;102(1):10-19
Purpose:
The clinical significance of margin status in pancreatic head cancer is still controversial due to the nonstandardized definition of R status and pathologic reporting. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the margin status including location and the role of radiation therapy in pancreatic head cancer.
Methods:
A total of 314 patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for pancreatic head cancer between 2010 and 2017 were analyzed. Demographics, survival, and local recurrences were compared according to 2 definitions: 0-mm R1 as direct involvement and 1-mm R1 as close resection margin less than 1 mm. The specific margins were divided into 4 groups according to the location around the pancreas: pancreas transection, anterior surface, posterior surface, and vessel (superior mesenteric artery/superior mesenteric vein) margin.
Results:
The 0-mm R1-rate was 15.6%, and increased to 36.3% in 1-mm R1. The median overall survival rate of 0-mm R0 vs. R1 was 26 months vs. 16 months (P = 0.052) and that of 1-mm R0 vs. R1 was 27 months vs. 18 months, respectively (P = 0.016). In individual margins, posterior, anterior surface, and pancreas transection margin involvement were associated with poor outcome, and the 1 mm posterior surface involvement was an independent risk factor for disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.63). Adjuvant radiation therapy had oncologic benefits, especially in R1 patients (P = 0.011) compared to R0 patients (P = 0.088).
Conclusion
Margin status, especially 1-mm R1 status is an important predictive factor, and involved posterior surface has a clinical impact. Patients with positive margins should be considered adjuvant radiation therapy.
8.Dosimetric evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging-guided adaptive radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer by extent of re-contouring of organs-at-risk
Jun Yeong SONG ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Seong-Hee KANG ; Yeon-Jun JEON ; Yoon-Ah KO ; Dong-Yun KIM ; Hyun-Cheol KANG
Radiation Oncology Journal 2022;40(4):242-250
Purpose:
The safety of online contouring and planning for adaptive radiotherapy is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric difference of the organ-at-risk (OAR) according to the extent of contouring in stereotactic magnetic resonance image-guided adaptive RT (SMART) for pancreatic cancer.
Materials and Methods:
We reviewed the treatment plan data used for SMART in patients with pancreatic cancer. For the online contouring and planning, OARs within 2 cm from the planning target volume (PTV) in the craniocaudal direction were re-controlled daily at the attending physician's discretion. The entire OARs were re-contoured retrospectively for data analysis. We termed the two contouring methods the Rough OAR and the Full OAR, respectively. The proportion of dose constraint violation and other dosimetric parameters was analyzed.
Results:
Nineteen patients with 94 fractions of SMART were included in the analysis. The dose constraint was violated in 10.6% and 43.6% of the fractions in Rough OAR and Full OAR methods, respectively (p = 0.075). Patients with a large tumor, a short distance from gross tumor volume (GTV) to OAR, and a tumor in the body or tail were associated with more occult dose constraint violations—large tumor (p = 0.027), short distance from GTV to OAR (p = 0.061), tumor in body or tail (p = 0.054). No dose constraint violation occurred outside 2 cm from the PTV.
Conclusion
More occult dose constraint violations can be found by the Full OAR method in patients with pancreatic cancer with some clinical factors in the online re-planning for SMART. Re-contouring all the OARs would be helpful to detect occult dose constraint violations in SMART planning. Since the dosimetric profile of SMART cannot be represented by a single fraction, patient selection for the Full OAR method should be weighted between the clinical usefulness and the time and workforce required.
9.Multi-Center Study on Gender Difference in Resectability and Pathologic Prognosis of Gallbladder Cancer
Yang Tae PARK ; Jinhyong KANG ; Jae Seon KIM ; Min Kyu JUNG ; Seong Hun KIM ; Jae Hee CHO ; Sang Myung WOO ; Kyong Joo LEE ; Eui Joo KIM ; Hyo Jung KIM
Korean Journal of Pancreas and Biliary Tract 2022;27(3):121-127
Background:
/Aim: In gallbladder cancer (GBC), gender differences in incidence and mortality rates have been reported with geographic variation. However, there is little known about sex-related difference in GBC prognosis. This study compares prognostic factors according to gender for GBC.
Methods:
We searched clinicopathological factors in all stages of 952 GBC patients from seven medical centers in Korea. A total of 927 patients were enrolled and surgery with curative resection was performed in 499 patients.
Results:
Carbohydrate antigen (≥37 U/mL) was a significant prognostic factor in both females and males (odd ratio [OR], 4.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.13-5.89; p<0.001). Age was a significant factor only in female patients, elderly patients were associated with low resectability and the likelihood of T-stage >2; an independent predictor of poor prognosis via multivariate analysis (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; p=0.005, OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; p=0.002). Body mass index (BMI) also showed gender difference, and lower BMI (≤25 kg/m2) was the significant good indicator of multivariate analysis for lymph node metastasis in female patients (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.77; p=0.005) but, the significant poor indicator of univariate analysis for advanced T-stage in male (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.40-5.54; p=0.003).
Conclusions
These results suggest that there is a possibility of gender difference in GBC prognosis. Age and high BMI were poor prognostic factors for curative resection for female GBC patients.
10.Role of Dedicated Subspecialized Radiologists in Multidisciplinary Team Discussions on Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Cancers
Sun Kyung JEON ; Se Hyung KIM ; Cheong-il SHIN ; Jeongin YOO ; Kyu Joo PARK ; Seung-Bum RYOO ; Ji Won PARK ; Tae-You KIM ; Sae-Won HAN ; Dae-Won LEE ; Eui Kyu CHIE ; Hyun-Cheol KANG
Korean Journal of Radiology 2022;23(7):732-
Objective:
To determine the impact of dedicated subspecialized radiologists in multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions on the management of lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract malignancies.
Materials and Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the data of 244 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 61.7 ± 11.9 years) referred to MDT discussions 249 times (i.e., 249 cases, as five patients were discussed twice for different issues) for lower GI tract malignancy including colorectal cancer, small bowel cancer, GI stromal tumor, and GI neuroendocrine tumor between April 2018 and June 2021 in a prospective database. Before the MDT discussions, dedicated GI radiologists reviewed all imaging studies again besides routine clinical reading. The referring clinician’s initial diagnosis, initial treatment plan, change in radiologic interpretation compared with the initial radiology report, and the MDT’s consensus recommendations for treatment were collected and compared. Factors associated with changes in treatment plans and the implementation of MDT decisions were analyzed.
Results:
Of the 249 cases, radiologic interpretation was changed in 73 cases (29.3%) after a review by dedicated GI radiologists, with 78.1% (57/73) resulting in changes in the treatment plan. The treatment plan was changed in 92 cases (36.9%), and the rate of change in the treatment plan was significantly higher in cases with changes in radiologic interpretation than in those without (78.1% [57/73] vs. 19.9% [35/176], p < 0.001). Follow-up records of patients showed that 91.2% (227/249) of MDT recommendations for treatment were implemented. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that the nonsurgical approach (vs. surgical approach) decided through MDT discussion was a significant factor for patients being managed differently than the MDT recommendations (odds ratio, 4.48; p = 0.017).
Conclusion
MDT discussion involving additional review of radiology examinations by dedicated GI radiologists resulted in a change in the treatment plan in 36.9% of cases. Changes in treatment plans were significantly associated with changes in radiologic interpretation.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail