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.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.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.
4.Update of systemic treatments in severe/recalcitrant atopic dermatitis:Consensus document of the KAAACI working group on atopic dermatitis
Myongsoon SUNG ; Young-Il KOH ; Mi-Ae KIM ; Hyunjung KIM ; Jung Im NA ; Dong-Ho NAHM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Yang PARK ; Dong Hun LEE ; Mi-Hee LEE ; So-Yeon LEE ; Youngsoo LEE ; Chong Hyun WON ; Hye Yung YUM ; Mira CHOI ; Eung Ho CHOI ; Woo Kyung KIM ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2024;12(2):58-71
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most prevalent inflammatory skin condition, with approximately 80% of cases originating in childhood and some emerging in adulthood. In South Korea, the estimated prevalence of AD ranges between 10% and 20% in children and 1% and 3% in adults. Severe/recalcitrant AD manifests as a chronic, relapsing skin disorder, persisting with uncontrolled symptoms even after topical steroid treatment. Corticosteroids and systemic immunosuppression, conventionally the standard care for difficult-to-treat diseases, cause numerous undesirable side effects. When AD persists despite topical steroid application, systemic therapies like cyclosporine or systemic steroids become the second treatment strategy. The desire for targeted treatments, along with an enhanced understanding of AD’s pathophysiology, has spurred novel therapeutic development. Recent advances introduce novel systemic options, such as biological agents and small-molecule therapy, tailored to treat severe or recalcitrant AD. Notably, dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibiting interleukin 4 and 13, marked a transformative breakthrough upon gaining approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017, leading to a paradigm shift in the systemic treatment of AD. Furthermore, both dupilumab and Janus kinase inhibitors, including baricitinib, abrocitinib, and tofacitinib, now approved by the Korean FDA, have established their applicability in clinical practice. These innovative therapeutic agents have demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes, effectively addressing moderate to severe AD with fewer side reactions than those associated with previous systemic immunosuppressants. This review summarizes the latest advancements and evidence regarding systemic treatments for AD, including newly approved drugs in Korea.
5.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.
6.Data Resource Profile: The Cancer Public Library Database in South Korea
Dong-Woo CHOI ; Min Yeong GUK ; Hye Ri KIM ; Kwang Sun RYU ; Hyun-Joo KONG ; Hyo Soung CHA ; Hyun-Jin KIM ; Heejung CHAE ; Young Sang JEON ; Hwanhee KIM ; Jipmin JUNG ; Jeong-Soo IM ; Kui Son CHOI
Cancer Research and Treatment 2024;56(4):1014-1026
This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the Cancer Public Library Database (CPLD), established under the Korean Clinical Data Utilization for Research Excellence project (K-CURE). The CPLD links data from four major population-based public sources: the Korea National Cancer Incidence Database in the Korea Central Cancer Registry, cause-of-death data in Statistics Korea, the National Health Information Database in the National Health Insurance Service, and the National Health Insurance Research Database in the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service. These databases are linked using an encrypted resident registration number. The CPLD, established in 2022 and updated annually, comprises 1,983,499 men and women newly diagnosed with cancer between 2012 and 2019. It contains data on cancer registration and death, demographics, medical claims, general health checkups, and national cancer screening. The most common cancers among men in the CPLD were stomach (16.1%), lung (14.0%), colorectal (13.3%), prostate (9.6%), and liver (9.3%) cancers. The most common cancers among women were thyroid (20.4%), breast (16.6%), colorectal (9.0%), stomach (7.8%), and lung (6.2%) cancers. Among them, 571,285 died between 2012 and 2020 owing to cancer (89.2%) or other causes (10.8%). Upon approval, the CPLD is accessible to researchers through the K-CURE portal. The CPLD is a unique resource for diverse cancer research to investigate medical use before a cancer diagnosis, during initial diagnosis and treatment, and long-term follow-up. This offers expanded insight into healthcare delivery across the cancer continuum, from screening to end-of-life care.
7.Feasibility of the Threshold-Based Quantification of Myocardial Fibrosis on Cardiac CT as a Prognostic Marker in Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Na Young KIM ; Dong Jin IM ; Yoo Jin HONG ; Byoung Wook CHOI ; Seok-Min KANG ; Jong-Chan YOUN ; Hye-Jeong LEE
Korean Journal of Radiology 2024;25(6):540-549
Objective:
This study investigated the feasibility and prognostic relevance of threshold-based quantification of myocardial delayed enhancement (MDE) on CT in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM).
Materials and Methods:
Forty-three patients with NIDCM (59.3 ± 17.1 years; 21 male) were included in the study and underwent cardiac CT and MRI. MDE was quantified manually and with a threshold-based quantification method using cutoffs of 2, 3, and 4 standard deviations (SDs) on three sets of CT images (100 kVp, 120 kVp, and 70 keV). Interobserver agreement in MDE quantification was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement between CT and MRI was evaluated using the Bland-Altman method and the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). Patients were followed up for the subsequent occurrence of the primary composite outcome, including cardiac death, heart transplantation, heart failure hospitalization, or appropriate use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate event-free survival according to MDE levels.
Results:
Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was observed in 29 patients (67%, 29/43), and the mean LGE found with the 5-SD threshold was 4.1% ± 3.6%. The 4-SD threshold on 70-keV CT showed excellent interobserver agreement (ICC = 0.810) and the highest concordance with MRI (CCC = 0.803). This method also yielded the smallest bias with the narrowest range of 95% limits of agreement compared to MRI (bias, -0.119%; 95% limits of agreement, -4.216% to 3.978%). During a median follow-up of 1625 days (interquartile range, 712–1430 days), 10 patients (23%, 10/43) experienced the primary composite outcome. Event-free survival significantly differed between risk subgroups divided by the optimal MDE cutoff of 4.3% (log-rank P = 0.005).
Conclusion
The 4-SD threshold on 70-keV monochromatic CT yielded results comparable to those of MRI for quantifying MDE as a marker of myocardial fibrosis, which showed prognostic value in patients with NIDCM.
8.Epidemiologic and Clinical Outcomes of Pediatric Renal Tumors in Korea: A Retrospective Analysis of The Korean Pediatric Hematology and Oncology Group (KPHOG) Data
Kyung-Nam KOH ; Jung Woo HAN ; Hyoung Soo CHOI ; Hyoung Jin KANG ; Ji Won LEE ; Keon Hee YOO ; Ki Woong SUNG ; Hong Hoe KOO ; Kyung Taek HONG ; Jung Yoon CHOI ; Sung Han KANG ; Hyery KIM ; Ho Joon IM ; Seung Min HAHN ; Chuhl Joo LYU ; Hee-Jo BAEK ; Hoon KOOK ; Kyung Mi PARK ; Eu Jeen YANG ; Young Tak LIM ; Seongkoo KIM ; Jae Wook LEE ; Nack-Gyun CHUNG ; Bin CHO ; Meerim PARK ; Hyeon Jin PARK ; Byung-Kiu PARK ; Jun Ah LEE ; Jun Eun PARK ; Soon Ki KIM ; Ji Yoon KIM ; Hyo Sun KIM ; Youngeun MA ; Kyung Duk PARK ; Sang Kyu PARK ; Eun Sil PARK ; Ye Jee SHIM ; Eun Sun YOO ; Kyung Ha RYU ; Jae Won YOO ; Yeon Jung LIM ; Hoi Soo YOON ; Mee Jeong LEE ; Jae Min LEE ; In-Sang JEON ; Hye Lim JUNG ; Hee Won CHUEH ; Seunghyun WON ;
Cancer Research and Treatment 2023;55(1):279-290
Purpose:
Renal tumors account for approximately 7% of all childhood cancers. These include Wilms tumor (WT), clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK), malignant rhabdoid tumor of the kidney (MRTK), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), congenital mesoblastic nephroma (CMN) and other rare tumors. We investigated the epidemiology of pediatric renal tumors in Korea.
Materials and Methods:
From January 2001 to December 2015, data of pediatric patients (0–18 years) newly-diagnosed with renal tumors at 26 hospitals were retrospectively analyzed.
Results:
Among 439 patients (male, 240), the most common tumor was WT (n=342, 77.9%), followed by RCC (n=36, 8.2%), CCSK (n=24, 5.5%), MRTK (n=16, 3.6%), CMN (n=12, 2.7%), and others (n=9, 2.1%). Median age at diagnosis was 27.1 months (range 0-225.5) and median follow-up duration was 88.5 months (range 0-211.6). Overall, 32 patients died, of whom 17, 11, 1, and 3 died of relapse, progressive disease, second malignant neoplasm, and treatment-related mortality. Five-year overall survival and event free survival were 97.2% and 84.8% in WT, 90.6% and 82.1% in RCC, 81.1% and 63.6% in CCSK, 60.3% and 56.2% in MRTK, and 100% and 91.7% in CMN, respectively (p < 0.001).
Conclusion
The pediatric renal tumor types in Korea are similar to those previously reported in other countries. WT accounted for a large proportion and survival was excellent. Non-Wilms renal tumors included a variety of tumors and showed inferior outcome, especially MRTK. Further efforts are necessary to optimize the treatment and analyze the genetic characteristics of pediatric renal tumors in Korea.
9.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(1):3-106
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.
10.Erratum: Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidencebased, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(2):365-373

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail