1.Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: A Nationwide Cohort Study
Hye Yeon KOO ; In Young CHO ; Yoo Jin UM ; Yong-Moon Mark PARK ; Kyung Mee KIM ; Chung Eun LEE ; Kyungdo HAN
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2025;40(1):103-111
Background:
Intellectual disability (ID) may be associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus (DM). However, evidence from longitudinal studies is scarce, particularly in Asian populations.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study used representative linked data from the Korea National Disability Registration System and the National Health Insurance Service database. Adults (≥20 years) who received a national health examination in 2009 (3,385 individuals with ID and 3,463,604 individuals without ID) were included and followed until 2020. ID was identified using legal registration information. Incident DM was defined by prescription records with relevant diagnostic codes. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for DM risks in individuals with ID compared to those without ID.
Results:
Over a mean follow-up of 9.8 years, incident DM occurred in 302 (8.9%) individuals with ID and 299,156 (8.4%) individuals without ID. Having ID was associated with increased DM risk (aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.55). Sensitivity analysis confirmed a higher DM risk in individuals with ID (aHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.56) than those with other disabilities (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.13) or no disability (reference). Stratified analysis showed higher DM risk in non-hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.86) compared to hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.26; P for interaction <0.001).
Conclusion
Adults with ID have an increased risk of developing DM, highlighting the need for targeted public health strategies to promote DM prevention in this population.
2.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
3.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.
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.Comparison of encrustation between silicon-covered and polytetrafluoroethylene-covered metallic stent, in vitro experimental study
Deok Hyun HAN ; Woo Jin BANG ; Jae Hoon CHUNG
Investigative and Clinical Urology 2025;66(2):137-143
Purpose:
To compare encrustation resistance between silicon- and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered metallic ureteral stents (MUS) in an in vitro infection model and to determine the most effective material for reducing biofilm formation and encrustation.
Materials and Methods:
A total of 52 MUS were prepared: 26 silicon-covered and 26 PTFE-covered stents. Each sample was immersed in artificial urine inoculated with Proteus mirabilis in a biofilm reactor for 48 hours. After immersion, the stents were weighed to measure their encrustation level. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) were used to assess the surface morphology and elemental composition of the encrustation deposits.
Results:
Silicon-covered stents showed a statistically significant reduction in weight gain due to encrustation compared to PTFE-covered stents (9.50±5.77 mg vs. 16.75±10.61 mg; p=0.004). Additionally, encrustation per unit length was lower in silicon-covered stents (0.76±0.45 mg/mm vs. 1.30±0.81 mg/mm; p=0.004). SEM and EDS analyses demonstrated lower calcium salt deposition on the silicon-covered stents, indicating greater resistance to encrustation.
Conclusions
Silicon-covered MUS demonstrated superior resistance to encrustation compared to PTFE-covered stents, supporting silicon as a more suitable covering material for long-term MUS applications. This finding may lead to extended stent lifespans and a reduced frequency of stent replacements, benefiting both patients and healthcare systems.
6.Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: A Nationwide Cohort Study
Hye Yeon KOO ; In Young CHO ; Yoo Jin UM ; Yong-Moon Mark PARK ; Kyung Mee KIM ; Chung Eun LEE ; Kyungdo HAN
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2025;40(1):103-111
Background:
Intellectual disability (ID) may be associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus (DM). However, evidence from longitudinal studies is scarce, particularly in Asian populations.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study used representative linked data from the Korea National Disability Registration System and the National Health Insurance Service database. Adults (≥20 years) who received a national health examination in 2009 (3,385 individuals with ID and 3,463,604 individuals without ID) were included and followed until 2020. ID was identified using legal registration information. Incident DM was defined by prescription records with relevant diagnostic codes. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for DM risks in individuals with ID compared to those without ID.
Results:
Over a mean follow-up of 9.8 years, incident DM occurred in 302 (8.9%) individuals with ID and 299,156 (8.4%) individuals without ID. Having ID was associated with increased DM risk (aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.55). Sensitivity analysis confirmed a higher DM risk in individuals with ID (aHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.56) than those with other disabilities (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.13) or no disability (reference). Stratified analysis showed higher DM risk in non-hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.86) compared to hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.26; P for interaction <0.001).
Conclusion
Adults with ID have an increased risk of developing DM, highlighting the need for targeted public health strategies to promote DM prevention in this population.
7.Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: A Nationwide Cohort Study
Hye Yeon KOO ; In Young CHO ; Yoo Jin UM ; Yong-Moon Mark PARK ; Kyung Mee KIM ; Chung Eun LEE ; Kyungdo HAN
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2025;40(1):103-111
Background:
Intellectual disability (ID) may be associated with an increased risk of diabetes mellitus (DM). However, evidence from longitudinal studies is scarce, particularly in Asian populations.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study used representative linked data from the Korea National Disability Registration System and the National Health Insurance Service database. Adults (≥20 years) who received a national health examination in 2009 (3,385 individuals with ID and 3,463,604 individuals without ID) were included and followed until 2020. ID was identified using legal registration information. Incident DM was defined by prescription records with relevant diagnostic codes. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for DM risks in individuals with ID compared to those without ID.
Results:
Over a mean follow-up of 9.8 years, incident DM occurred in 302 (8.9%) individuals with ID and 299,156 (8.4%) individuals without ID. Having ID was associated with increased DM risk (aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.55). Sensitivity analysis confirmed a higher DM risk in individuals with ID (aHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.56) than those with other disabilities (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.13) or no disability (reference). Stratified analysis showed higher DM risk in non-hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.86) compared to hypertensive subjects (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.26; P for interaction <0.001).
Conclusion
Adults with ID have an increased risk of developing DM, highlighting the need for targeted public health strategies to promote DM prevention in this population.
8.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
9.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.
10.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.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail