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.

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.

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.

Background: Chromosomal alterations serve as diagnostic and prognostic markers in acute leukemia. Given the evolving landscape of chromosomal abnormalities in acute leukemia, we previously studied these over two periods. In this study, we investigated the frequency of these abnormalities and clinical trends in acute leukemia in Korea across three time periods. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 1,787 patients with acute leukemia (319 children and 1,468 adults) diagnosed between 2006 and 2020. Conventional cytogenetics, FISH, and multiplex quantitative PCR were used for analysis. The patient groups were divided according to the following three study periods: 2006–2009 (I), 2010–2015 (II), and 2016–2020 (III). Results: Chromosomal aberrations were detected in 92% of patients. The PML::RARA translocation was the most frequent. Over the 15-yr period, chromosomal aberrations showed minimal changes, with specific fusion transcripts being common among patients.ALL was more prevalent in children than in adults and correlated significantly with the ETV6::RUNX1 and RUNX1::RUNX1T1 aberrations. The incidence of ALL increased during the three periods, with PML::RARA remaining common. Conclusions The frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in acute leukemia has changed subtly over time. Notably, the age of onset of adult AML has continuously increased. Our results may help in establishing diagnoses and clinical treatment strategies and developing various molecular diagnostic platforms.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the presence of autoantigens in the gastric juices of children. Methods: Gastric juice and serum samples were obtained from 53 children <15 years of age who underwent gastric endoscopy. Among these, 8, 22, and 23 participants were in the age groups 0–5, 6–10, and 11–15 years, respectively. These samples were analyzed using two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE), immunoblot analysis, and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of-flight mass spectrometry. Furthermore, we reviewed the histopathological findings and urease test results and compared them with the results of 2-DE and immunoblot analysis. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in urease test positivity, grades of chronic gastritis, active gastritis, or Helicobacter pylori infiltration of the antrum and body among the three age groups. Three distinct patterns of gastric juice were observed on 2-DE. Pattern I was the most common, and pattern III was not observed below the age of 5 years.Histopathological findings were significantly different among active gastritis (p=0.037) and H. pylori infiltration (p=0.060) in the gastric body. The immunoblots showed large spots at an approximate pH of 3–4 and molecular weights of 31–45 kDa. These distinct, large positive spots were identified as gastric lipase and pepsin A and C. Conclusion Three enzymes, which are normally secreted under acidic conditions were identified as autoantigens. Further investigation of the pathophysiology and function of autoantigens in the stomach is required.

Background/Aims: The prognostic significance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) in peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) are controversial. We explored the prognostic impact of sequential 18F-FDG PET/CT during frontline chemotherapy of patients with PTCLs. Methods: In total, 143 patients with newly diagnosed PTCLs were included. Sequential 18F-FDG PET/CTs were performed at the time of diagnosis, during chemotherapy, and at the end of chemotherapy. The baseline total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV) was calculated using the the standard uptake value with a threshold method of 2.5. Results: A baseline TMTV of 457.0 cm3 was used to categorize patients into high and low TMTV groups. Patients with a requirehigh TMTV had shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than those with a low TMTV (PFS, 9.8 vs. 26.5 mo, p = 0.043; OS, 18.9 vs. 71.2 mo, p = 0.004). The interim 18F-FDG PET/CT response score was recorded as 1, 2–3, and 4–5 according to the Deauville criteria. The PFS and OS showed significant differences according to the interim 18F-FDG PET/CT response score (PFS, 120.7 vs. 34.1 vs. 5.1 mo, p < 0.001; OS, not reached vs. 61.1 mo vs. 12.1 mo, p < 0.001). Conclusions The interim PET/CT response based on visual assessment predicts disease progression and survival outcome in PTCLs. A high baseline TMTV is associated with a poor response to anthracycline-based chemotherapy in PTCLs. However, TMTV was not an independent predictor for PFS in the multivariate analysis.