1.Diagnosis of Oral-Facial-Digital Syndrome I in a Patient with Suspected Polycystic Kidney Disease
Jiwon LEE ; Jong Eun PARK ; Sang-Woong HAN ; Mi-Yeon YU
Korean Journal of Medicine 2025;100(1):40-43
Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) typically manifests as genetic disease, which is commonly attributed to mutations in PKD genes. In this particular case, however, genetic analysis revealed that the patient’s PKD is linked to a novel, likely pathogenic variant (c.2184del; p.Thr729Leufs*88) in the oral-facial-digital syndrome type I (OFD1) gene. This is the first confirmed genetic diagnosis of mutations in the OFD1 gene in Korea. This investigation emphasizes the critical utility of panel sequencing of PKD in offering precise diagnosis and understanding the genetic profiles of PKD.
2.Minocycline Susceptibility of Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Blood Isolates from a Single Center in Korea: Role of tetB in Resistance
Taeeun KIM ; Eun Hee JEON ; Yoon-Kyoung HONG ; Jiwon JUNG ; Min Jae KIM ; Heungsup SUNG ; Mi-Na KIM ; Sung-Han KIM ; Sang-Ho CHOI ; Sang-Oh LEE ; Yang Soo KIM ; Yong Pil CHONG
Infection and Chemotherapy 2025;57(1):111-118
Background:
Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) represents a devastating and growing global threat, calling for new antibiotic treatments. In Korea, the challenge of treating CRAB is compounded by high nosocomial acquisition rates and limited availability of novel antibiotics. Minocycline, a semisynthetic tetracycline derivative, has been proposed as a therapeutic option for CRAB infections. Nonsusceptibility to minocycline may occur through the efflux pump, TetB. The prevalence of tetB in A. baumannii has increased, along with higher minocycline minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). We aimed to evaluate minocycline susceptibility rates in clinical strains of CRAB, and the association between tetB carriage and minocycline susceptibility across different genotypes.
Materials and Methods:
Representative CRAB blood isolates were collected from Asan Medical Center, Seoul.Minocycline susceptibility was assessed using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoint (≤4 mg/L) and the proposed pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) breakpoint (≤1 mg/L). Tigecycline was used as a comparator, and its susceptibility breakpoint for Enterobacterales defined by EUCAST was applied (≤0.5 mg/L).The presence of tetB was detected by PCR, and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) was performed using seven housekeeping genes.
Results:
Of the 160 CRAB blood isolates, 83.8% were susceptible to minocycline by the CLSI criteria, and 50.6% were PK-PD susceptible by the PK-PD criteria. The minocycline minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)50 /MIC90 was 1/8 mg/L. tetB was present in 49% of isolates and was associated with a higher minocycline MIC (MIC50/90 2/8 mg/L vs. 1/2 mg/L). No clear correlation was observed between tetB positivity and tigecycline MIC. Nine MLSTs were identified, with significant differences in tetB carriage rates between the major sequence types. Notably, ST191, associated with non-tetB carriage and greater susceptibility to minocycline, declined over the study period (P=0.004), while ST451, associated with tetB carriage, increased.
Conclusion
tetB was present in 49% of CRAB isolates and was associated with higher MICs and non-susceptibility by both CLSI and PK-PD criteria. However, absence of tetB was not a reliable predictor of minocycline PK-PD susceptibility. Additionally, shifts over time towards genotypes with reduced minocycline susceptibility were observed. Further research is needed to correlate these findings with clinical outcomes and identify additional resistance mechanisms.
3.Diagnosis of Oral-Facial-Digital Syndrome I in a Patient with Suspected Polycystic Kidney Disease
Jiwon LEE ; Jong Eun PARK ; Sang-Woong HAN ; Mi-Yeon YU
Korean Journal of Medicine 2025;100(1):40-43
Polycystic kidney disease (PKD) typically manifests as genetic disease, which is commonly attributed to mutations in PKD genes. In this particular case, however, genetic analysis revealed that the patient’s PKD is linked to a novel, likely pathogenic variant (c.2184del; p.Thr729Leufs*88) in the oral-facial-digital syndrome type I (OFD1) gene. This is the first confirmed genetic diagnosis of mutations in the OFD1 gene in Korea. This investigation emphasizes the critical utility of panel sequencing of PKD in offering precise diagnosis and understanding the genetic profiles of PKD.
4.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
5.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.
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.Minocycline Susceptibility of Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Blood Isolates from a Single Center in Korea: Role of tetB in Resistance
Taeeun KIM ; Eun Hee JEON ; Yoon-Kyoung HONG ; Jiwon JUNG ; Min Jae KIM ; Heungsup SUNG ; Mi-Na KIM ; Sung-Han KIM ; Sang-Ho CHOI ; Sang-Oh LEE ; Yang Soo KIM ; Yong Pil CHONG
Infection and Chemotherapy 2025;57(1):111-118
Background:
Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) represents a devastating and growing global threat, calling for new antibiotic treatments. In Korea, the challenge of treating CRAB is compounded by high nosocomial acquisition rates and limited availability of novel antibiotics. Minocycline, a semisynthetic tetracycline derivative, has been proposed as a therapeutic option for CRAB infections. Nonsusceptibility to minocycline may occur through the efflux pump, TetB. The prevalence of tetB in A. baumannii has increased, along with higher minocycline minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). We aimed to evaluate minocycline susceptibility rates in clinical strains of CRAB, and the association between tetB carriage and minocycline susceptibility across different genotypes.
Materials and Methods:
Representative CRAB blood isolates were collected from Asan Medical Center, Seoul.Minocycline susceptibility was assessed using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoint (≤4 mg/L) and the proposed pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) breakpoint (≤1 mg/L). Tigecycline was used as a comparator, and its susceptibility breakpoint for Enterobacterales defined by EUCAST was applied (≤0.5 mg/L).The presence of tetB was detected by PCR, and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) was performed using seven housekeeping genes.
Results:
Of the 160 CRAB blood isolates, 83.8% were susceptible to minocycline by the CLSI criteria, and 50.6% were PK-PD susceptible by the PK-PD criteria. The minocycline minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)50 /MIC90 was 1/8 mg/L. tetB was present in 49% of isolates and was associated with a higher minocycline MIC (MIC50/90 2/8 mg/L vs. 1/2 mg/L). No clear correlation was observed between tetB positivity and tigecycline MIC. Nine MLSTs were identified, with significant differences in tetB carriage rates between the major sequence types. Notably, ST191, associated with non-tetB carriage and greater susceptibility to minocycline, declined over the study period (P=0.004), while ST451, associated with tetB carriage, increased.
Conclusion
tetB was present in 49% of CRAB isolates and was associated with higher MICs and non-susceptibility by both CLSI and PK-PD criteria. However, absence of tetB was not a reliable predictor of minocycline PK-PD susceptibility. Additionally, shifts over time towards genotypes with reduced minocycline susceptibility were observed. Further research is needed to correlate these findings with clinical outcomes and identify additional resistance mechanisms.
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