1.Impact of HER2-Low Status on Pathologic Complete Response and Survival Outcome Among Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Young Joo LEE ; Tae-Kyung YOO ; Sae Byul LEE ; Il Yong CHUNG ; Hee Jeong KIM ; Beom Seok KO ; Jong Won LEE ; Byung Ho SON ; Sei Hyun AHN ; Hyehyun JEONG ; Jae Ho JUNG ; Jin-Hee AHN ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Sung-Bae KIM ; Hee Jin LEE ; Gyungyub GONG ; Jisun KIM
Journal of Breast Cancer 2025;28(1):11-22
Purpose:
This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment.
Methods:
This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed.
Results:
Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953).
Conclusion
Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.
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.Impact of HER2-Low Status on Pathologic Complete Response and Survival Outcome Among Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Young Joo LEE ; Tae-Kyung YOO ; Sae Byul LEE ; Il Yong CHUNG ; Hee Jeong KIM ; Beom Seok KO ; Jong Won LEE ; Byung Ho SON ; Sei Hyun AHN ; Hyehyun JEONG ; Jae Ho JUNG ; Jin-Hee AHN ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Sung-Bae KIM ; Hee Jin LEE ; Gyungyub GONG ; Jisun KIM
Journal of Breast Cancer 2025;28(1):11-22
Purpose:
This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment.
Methods:
This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed.
Results:
Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953).
Conclusion
Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.
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.Impact of HER2-Low Status on Pathologic Complete Response and Survival Outcome Among Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Young Joo LEE ; Tae-Kyung YOO ; Sae Byul LEE ; Il Yong CHUNG ; Hee Jeong KIM ; Beom Seok KO ; Jong Won LEE ; Byung Ho SON ; Sei Hyun AHN ; Hyehyun JEONG ; Jae Ho JUNG ; Jin-Hee AHN ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Sung-Bae KIM ; Hee Jin LEE ; Gyungyub GONG ; Jisun KIM
Journal of Breast Cancer 2025;28(1):11-22
Purpose:
This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment.
Methods:
This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed.
Results:
Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953).
Conclusion
Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.
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.Spinal Schwannoma Classification Based on the Presumed Origin With Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Images
Tae-Shin KIM ; Jae Hee KUH ; Junhoe KIM ; Woon Tak YUH ; Junghoon HAN ; Chang-Hyun LEE ; Chi Heon KIM ; Chun Kee CHUNG
Neurospine 2024;21(3):890-902
Objective:
Classification guides the surgical approach and predicts prognosis. However, existing classifications of spinal schwannomas often result in a high ‘unclassified’ rate. Here, we aim to develop a new comprehensive classification for spinal schwannomas based on their presumed origin. We compared the new classification with the existing classifications regarding the rate of ‘unclassified’. Finally, we assessed the surgical strategies, outcomes, and complications according to each type of the new classification.
Methods:
A new classification with 9 types was created by analyzing the anatomy of spinal nerves and the origin of significant tumor portions and cystic components in preoperative magnetic resonance images. A total of 482 patients with spinal schwannomas were analyzed to compare our new classification with the existing classifications. We defined ‘unclassified’ as the inability to classify a patient with spinal schwannoma using the classification criteria. Surgical approaches and outcomes were also aligned with our new classification.
Results:
Our classification uniquely reported no ‘unclassified’ cases, indicating full applicability. Also, the classification has demonstrated usefulness in predicting the surgical outcome with the approach planned. Gross total removal rates reached 88.0% overall, with type 1 and type 2 tumors at 95.3% and 96.0% respectively. The approach varied with tumor type, with laminectomy predominantly used for types 1, 2, and 9, and facetectomy with posterior fixation used for type 3 tumors.
Conclusion
The new classification for spinal schwannomas based on presumed origin is applicable to all spinal schwannomas. It could help plan a surgical approach and predict its outcome, compared with existing classifications.
8.Effect of Residual Stone Fragments on Patient-Reported Quality of Life after Endoscopic Kidney Stone Surgery
Sang Hee LEE ; Jun-Koo KANG ; Jae-Wook CHUNG ; Yun-Sok HA ; Jun Nyung LEE ; Seock Hwan CHOI ; Hyun Tae KIM ; Tae-Hwan KIM ; Eun Sang YOO ; Tae Gyun KWON ; Bum Soo KIM
Urogenital Tract Infection 2024;19(2):31-39
Purpose:
This study examined the effects of residual fragments (RF) on the patient-reported quality of life (QOL) after kidney stone surgery, such as retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), using the Korean version of the Wisconsin Stone Quality of Life Questionnaire (K-WISQOL).
Materials and Methods:
The medical records of 156 patients who underwent RIRS or PCNL and completed the preoperative and postoperative K-WISQOL from January 2021 to September 2023 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into RIRS and PCNL groups by the surgical method. The participants completed the K-WISQOL within four weeks before and after treatment. The patients’ baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, and K-WISQOL scores were compared according to the presence of RF in each surgical group.
Results:
Of the 156 patients, 95 underwent RIRS, and 61 underwent PCNL. In the RIRS group, the patients’ baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes were similar in the stone-free (SF) and RF subgroups. The changes in all K-WISQOL domain scores and total scores were similar in the two subgroups. In the PCNL group, the RF subgroup had a significantly higher proportion of staghorn stones, a significantly larger mean stone diameter and significantly longer operation time than those of the SF subgroup. But, the changes in all K-WISQOL domain scores and total scores were not significantly different between the two subgroups, as observed in the RIRS group.
Conclusions
This study showed that the presence of RFs after endoscopic kidney surgery did not affect the short-term patient-reported QOL regardless of the surgical methods.
9.Development and Assessment of a Novel Ulcerative Colitis–Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire:A Prospective, Multi-Institutional Study
Jihye PARK ; Hyun-Soo ZHANG ; Chung Mo NAM ; Joo Sung KIM ; Young-Ho KIM ; Dong Il PARK ; Byong Duk YE ; Yoon Tae JEEN ; Sehyun KIM ; Jae Hee CHEON
Yonsei Medical Journal 2024;65(11):636-644
Purpose:
Interest in the quality of life (QoL) of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has recently increased. Although measurement tools have been devised for IBD in general, there is no specific tool for measuring the QoL of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Therefore, we developed a QoL questionnaire specifically for patients with UC.
Materials and Methods:
The Korean Ulcerative Colitis-Specific Questionnaire (K-UCSQ) was developed through item generation, raw-scale construction, focus group meetings, and multi-center field tests. Two hundred patients with UC were recruited for a field test of the K-UCSQ, and subsequent responses to the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) were also obtained. After performing factor analyses to ensure construct validity, the K-UCSQ was finalized as a four-domain, 28-item questionnaire. Subsequent analyses evaluated the reliability of the K-UCSQ in terms of Cronbach’s alpha, concurrent validity in comparison with the pre-established IBDQ, and predictive validity of the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for clinically relevant QoL outcomes.
Results:
A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.94 showed excellent reliability. Furthermore, correlation analyses demonstrated the concurrent validity of the K-UCSQ in comparison with the IBDQ. The K-UCSQ also showed high validity in predicting the perceived overall health (AUC of 0.812 vs. 0.797 using the IBDQ) and past 2-week QoL (AUC of 0.864 vs. 0.859 using the IBDQ).
Conclusion
The newly developed K-UCSQ is concise, bathroom problem-emphasizing, and UC-specific, suggesting that it could be a valid and reliable UC-specific instrument for QoL measurement.
10.Erratum to: Corrigendum: 2023 Korean Society of Menopause -Osteoporosis Guidelines Part I
Dong Ock LEE ; Yeon Hee HONG ; Moon Kyoung CHO ; Young Sik CHOI ; Sungwook CHUN ; Youn-Jee CHUNG ; Seung Hwa HONG ; Kyu Ri HWANG ; Jinju KIM ; Hoon KIM ; Dong-Yun LEE ; Sa Ra LEE ; Hyun-Tae PARK ; Seok Kyo SEO ; Jung-Ho SHIN ; Jae Yen SONG ; Kyong Wook YI ; Haerin PAIK ; Ji Young LEE
Journal of Menopausal Medicine 2024;30(3):179-179

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail