1.Reproducibility of Plasma Biomarker Measurements Across Laboratories:Insights Into ptau217, GFAP, and NfL
Heekyoung KANG ; Sook-Young WOO ; Daeun SHIN ; Sohyun YIM ; Eun Hye LEE ; Hyunchul RYU ; Bora CHU ; Henrik ZETTERBERG ; Kaj BLENNOW ; Jihwan YUN ; Duk L NA ; Hee Jin KIM ; Hyemin JANG ; Jun Pyo KIM ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(2):91-101
Background:
and Purpose: Plasma biomarkers, including phosphorylated tau (ptau217), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL), are promising tools for detecting Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. However, cross-laboratory reproducibility remains a challenge, even when using identical analytical platforms such as single-molecule array (Simoa). This study aimed to compare plasma biomarker measurements (ptau217, GFAP, and NfL) between 2 laboratories, the University of Gothenburg (UGOT) and DNAlink, and evaluate their associations with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
Methods:
Plasma biomarkers were measured using Simoa platforms at both laboratories:the UGOT and DNAlink Incorporation. Diagnostic performance for predicting amyloid PET positivity, cross-laboratory agreement, and the impact of normalization techniques were assessed. Bland-Altman plots and correlation analyses were employed to evaluate agreement and variability.
Results:
Plasma ptau217 concentrations exhibited strong correlations with amyloid PET global centiloid values, with comparable diagnostic performance between laboratories (area under the curve=0.94 for UGOT and 0.95 for DNAlink). Cross-laboratory agreement for ptau217 was excellent (r=0.96), improving further after natural log transformation. GFAP and NfL also demonstrated moderate to strong correlations (r=0.86 for GFAP and r=0.99 for NfL), with normalization reducing variability.
Conclusions
Plasma biomarker measurements were consistent across laboratories using identical Simoa platforms, with strong diagnostic performance and improved agreement after normalization. These findings support the scalability of plasma biomarkers for multicenter studies and underscore their potential for standardized applications in AD research and clinical practice.
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.Reproducibility of Plasma Biomarker Measurements Across Laboratories:Insights Into ptau217, GFAP, and NfL
Heekyoung KANG ; Sook-Young WOO ; Daeun SHIN ; Sohyun YIM ; Eun Hye LEE ; Hyunchul RYU ; Bora CHU ; Henrik ZETTERBERG ; Kaj BLENNOW ; Jihwan YUN ; Duk L NA ; Hee Jin KIM ; Hyemin JANG ; Jun Pyo KIM ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(2):91-101
Background:
and Purpose: Plasma biomarkers, including phosphorylated tau (ptau217), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL), are promising tools for detecting Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. However, cross-laboratory reproducibility remains a challenge, even when using identical analytical platforms such as single-molecule array (Simoa). This study aimed to compare plasma biomarker measurements (ptau217, GFAP, and NfL) between 2 laboratories, the University of Gothenburg (UGOT) and DNAlink, and evaluate their associations with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
Methods:
Plasma biomarkers were measured using Simoa platforms at both laboratories:the UGOT and DNAlink Incorporation. Diagnostic performance for predicting amyloid PET positivity, cross-laboratory agreement, and the impact of normalization techniques were assessed. Bland-Altman plots and correlation analyses were employed to evaluate agreement and variability.
Results:
Plasma ptau217 concentrations exhibited strong correlations with amyloid PET global centiloid values, with comparable diagnostic performance between laboratories (area under the curve=0.94 for UGOT and 0.95 for DNAlink). Cross-laboratory agreement for ptau217 was excellent (r=0.96), improving further after natural log transformation. GFAP and NfL also demonstrated moderate to strong correlations (r=0.86 for GFAP and r=0.99 for NfL), with normalization reducing variability.
Conclusions
Plasma biomarker measurements were consistent across laboratories using identical Simoa platforms, with strong diagnostic performance and improved agreement after normalization. These findings support the scalability of plasma biomarkers for multicenter studies and underscore their potential for standardized applications in AD research and clinical practice.
4.Reproducibility of Plasma Biomarker Measurements Across Laboratories:Insights Into ptau217, GFAP, and NfL
Heekyoung KANG ; Sook-Young WOO ; Daeun SHIN ; Sohyun YIM ; Eun Hye LEE ; Hyunchul RYU ; Bora CHU ; Henrik ZETTERBERG ; Kaj BLENNOW ; Jihwan YUN ; Duk L NA ; Hee Jin KIM ; Hyemin JANG ; Jun Pyo KIM ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(2):91-101
Background:
and Purpose: Plasma biomarkers, including phosphorylated tau (ptau217), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL), are promising tools for detecting Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. However, cross-laboratory reproducibility remains a challenge, even when using identical analytical platforms such as single-molecule array (Simoa). This study aimed to compare plasma biomarker measurements (ptau217, GFAP, and NfL) between 2 laboratories, the University of Gothenburg (UGOT) and DNAlink, and evaluate their associations with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
Methods:
Plasma biomarkers were measured using Simoa platforms at both laboratories:the UGOT and DNAlink Incorporation. Diagnostic performance for predicting amyloid PET positivity, cross-laboratory agreement, and the impact of normalization techniques were assessed. Bland-Altman plots and correlation analyses were employed to evaluate agreement and variability.
Results:
Plasma ptau217 concentrations exhibited strong correlations with amyloid PET global centiloid values, with comparable diagnostic performance between laboratories (area under the curve=0.94 for UGOT and 0.95 for DNAlink). Cross-laboratory agreement for ptau217 was excellent (r=0.96), improving further after natural log transformation. GFAP and NfL also demonstrated moderate to strong correlations (r=0.86 for GFAP and r=0.99 for NfL), with normalization reducing variability.
Conclusions
Plasma biomarker measurements were consistent across laboratories using identical Simoa platforms, with strong diagnostic performance and improved agreement after normalization. These findings support the scalability of plasma biomarkers for multicenter studies and underscore their potential for standardized applications in AD research and clinical practice.
5.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.
6.Reproducibility of Plasma Biomarker Measurements Across Laboratories:Insights Into ptau217, GFAP, and NfL
Heekyoung KANG ; Sook-Young WOO ; Daeun SHIN ; Sohyun YIM ; Eun Hye LEE ; Hyunchul RYU ; Bora CHU ; Henrik ZETTERBERG ; Kaj BLENNOW ; Jihwan YUN ; Duk L NA ; Hee Jin KIM ; Hyemin JANG ; Jun Pyo KIM ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(2):91-101
Background:
and Purpose: Plasma biomarkers, including phosphorylated tau (ptau217), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL), are promising tools for detecting Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. However, cross-laboratory reproducibility remains a challenge, even when using identical analytical platforms such as single-molecule array (Simoa). This study aimed to compare plasma biomarker measurements (ptau217, GFAP, and NfL) between 2 laboratories, the University of Gothenburg (UGOT) and DNAlink, and evaluate their associations with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging.
Methods:
Plasma biomarkers were measured using Simoa platforms at both laboratories:the UGOT and DNAlink Incorporation. Diagnostic performance for predicting amyloid PET positivity, cross-laboratory agreement, and the impact of normalization techniques were assessed. Bland-Altman plots and correlation analyses were employed to evaluate agreement and variability.
Results:
Plasma ptau217 concentrations exhibited strong correlations with amyloid PET global centiloid values, with comparable diagnostic performance between laboratories (area under the curve=0.94 for UGOT and 0.95 for DNAlink). Cross-laboratory agreement for ptau217 was excellent (r=0.96), improving further after natural log transformation. GFAP and NfL also demonstrated moderate to strong correlations (r=0.86 for GFAP and r=0.99 for NfL), with normalization reducing variability.
Conclusions
Plasma biomarker measurements were consistent across laboratories using identical Simoa platforms, with strong diagnostic performance and improved agreement after normalization. These findings support the scalability of plasma biomarkers for multicenter studies and underscore their potential for standardized applications in AD research and clinical practice.
7.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.
8.Characteristics of Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis at Diagnosis in Korea: Results From a Multicenter, Registry-Based, Inception Cohort Study
Jin Gyu LIM ; Ben KANG ; Seak Hee OH ; Eell RYOO ; Yu Bin KIM ; Yon Ho CHOE ; Yeoun Joo LEE ; Minsoo SHIN ; Hye Ran YANG ; Soon Chul KIM ; Yoo Min LEE ; Hong KOH ; Ji Sook PARK ; So Yoon CHOI ; Su Jin JEONG ; Yoon LEE ; Ju Young CHANG ; Tae Hyeong KIM ; Jung Ok SHIM ; Jin Soo MOON
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(49):e303-
Background:
We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea.
Methods:
This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated.
Results:
A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age.
Conclusion
This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.
9.Characteristics of Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis at Diagnosis in Korea: Results From a Multicenter, Registry-Based, Inception Cohort Study
Jin Gyu LIM ; Ben KANG ; Seak Hee OH ; Eell RYOO ; Yu Bin KIM ; Yon Ho CHOE ; Yeoun Joo LEE ; Minsoo SHIN ; Hye Ran YANG ; Soon Chul KIM ; Yoo Min LEE ; Hong KOH ; Ji Sook PARK ; So Yoon CHOI ; Su Jin JEONG ; Yoon LEE ; Ju Young CHANG ; Tae Hyeong KIM ; Jung Ok SHIM ; Jin Soo MOON
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(49):e303-
Background:
We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea.
Methods:
This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated.
Results:
A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age.
Conclusion
This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.
10.Characteristics of Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis at Diagnosis in Korea: Results From a Multicenter, Registry-Based, Inception Cohort Study
Jin Gyu LIM ; Ben KANG ; Seak Hee OH ; Eell RYOO ; Yu Bin KIM ; Yon Ho CHOE ; Yeoun Joo LEE ; Minsoo SHIN ; Hye Ran YANG ; Soon Chul KIM ; Yoo Min LEE ; Hong KOH ; Ji Sook PARK ; So Yoon CHOI ; Su Jin JEONG ; Yoon LEE ; Ju Young CHANG ; Tae Hyeong KIM ; Jung Ok SHIM ; Jin Soo MOON
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(49):e303-
Background:
We aimed to investigate the characteristics of pediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) at diagnosis in Korea.
Methods:
This was a multicenter, registry-based, inception cohort study conducted in Korea between 2021 and 2023. Children and adolescents newly diagnosed with UC < 18 years were included. Baseline clinicodemographics, results from laboratory, endoscopic exams, and Paris classification factors were collected, and associations between factors at diagnosis were investigated.
Results:
A total 205 patients with UC were included. Male-to-female ratio was 1.59:1, and the median age at diagnosis was 14.7 years (interquartile range 11.9–16.2). Disease extent of E1 comprised 12.2% (25/205), E2 24.9% (51/205), E3 11.2% (23/205), and E4 51.7% (106/205) of the patients. S1 comprised 13.7% (28/205) of the patients. The proportion of patients with a disease severity of S1 was significantly higher in patients with E4 compared to the other groups (E1: 0% vs. E2: 2% vs. E3: 0% vs. E4: 24.5%, P < 0.001). Significant differences between disease extent groups were also observed in Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (median 25 vs. 35 vs. 40 vs. 45, respectively, P < 0.001), hemoglobin (median 13.5 vs.13.2 vs. 11.6 vs. 11.4 g/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), platelet count (median 301 vs. 324 vs. 372 vs. 377 × 103 /μL, respectively, P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (median 0.05 vs. 0.10 vs. 0.17 vs. 0.38 mg/dL, respectively, P < 0.001), and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (median 4 vs. 4 vs. 4 vs. 5, respectively, P = 0.006). No significant differences were observed in factors between groups divided according to sex and diagnosis age.
Conclusion
This study represents the largest multicenter pediatric inflammatory bowel disease cohort in Korea. Disease severity was associated with disease extent in pediatric patients with UC at diagnosis.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail