1.Early effects of PCSK9 inhibitors: evolocumab versus alirocumab
Su-Hyun BAE ; Bong-Joon KIM ; Soo-Jin KIM ; Sung-Il IM ; Hyun-Su KIM ; Jung-Ho HEO
Kosin Medical Journal 2025;40(1):49-54
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			The significance of risk modification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is well recognized; however, the optimal timing for adminstering PCSK9 inhibitors remains unclear. Additionally, the lipid-lowering efficacy of evolocumab and alirocumab has not been fully established. This study evaluated the lipid-lowering effects of these two PCSK9 inhibitors. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Patients diagnosed with ACS, including unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who were treated with a PCSK9 inhibitor (evolocumab or alirocumab) during hospitalization for ACS between 2021 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed, and changes in LDL-C levels during the acute and subacute phases after PCSK9 inhibitor administration were compared between the evolocumab and alirocumab groups. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Among 80 patients diagnosed with ACS, 36 received evolocumab, while 44 were treated with alirocumab. The mean baseline LDL-C level was 123 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 128 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.456). In the subacute phase, the mean follow-up LDL-C levels were 47.05 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 49.5 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.585). The mean percentage reduction in LDL-C levels during the subacute phase was 60.41% in the evolocumab group and 58.51% in the alirocumab group (p=0.431). These differences were not statistically significant. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			No significant differences were observed between evolocumab and alirocumab. LDL-C levels exhibited a similar trend, characterized by a rapid decline in the acute phase, followed by a slight rebound in the subacute phase. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
2.Early effects of PCSK9 inhibitors: evolocumab versus alirocumab
Su-Hyun BAE ; Bong-Joon KIM ; Soo-Jin KIM ; Sung-Il IM ; Hyun-Su KIM ; Jung-Ho HEO
Kosin Medical Journal 2025;40(1):49-54
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			The significance of risk modification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is well recognized; however, the optimal timing for adminstering PCSK9 inhibitors remains unclear. Additionally, the lipid-lowering efficacy of evolocumab and alirocumab has not been fully established. This study evaluated the lipid-lowering effects of these two PCSK9 inhibitors. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Patients diagnosed with ACS, including unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who were treated with a PCSK9 inhibitor (evolocumab or alirocumab) during hospitalization for ACS between 2021 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed, and changes in LDL-C levels during the acute and subacute phases after PCSK9 inhibitor administration were compared between the evolocumab and alirocumab groups. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Among 80 patients diagnosed with ACS, 36 received evolocumab, while 44 were treated with alirocumab. The mean baseline LDL-C level was 123 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 128 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.456). In the subacute phase, the mean follow-up LDL-C levels were 47.05 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 49.5 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.585). The mean percentage reduction in LDL-C levels during the subacute phase was 60.41% in the evolocumab group and 58.51% in the alirocumab group (p=0.431). These differences were not statistically significant. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			No significant differences were observed between evolocumab and alirocumab. LDL-C levels exhibited a similar trend, characterized by a rapid decline in the acute phase, followed by a slight rebound in the subacute phase. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
3.Early effects of PCSK9 inhibitors: evolocumab versus alirocumab
Su-Hyun BAE ; Bong-Joon KIM ; Soo-Jin KIM ; Sung-Il IM ; Hyun-Su KIM ; Jung-Ho HEO
Kosin Medical Journal 2025;40(1):49-54
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			The significance of risk modification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is well recognized; however, the optimal timing for adminstering PCSK9 inhibitors remains unclear. Additionally, the lipid-lowering efficacy of evolocumab and alirocumab has not been fully established. This study evaluated the lipid-lowering effects of these two PCSK9 inhibitors. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Patients diagnosed with ACS, including unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who were treated with a PCSK9 inhibitor (evolocumab or alirocumab) during hospitalization for ACS between 2021 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed, and changes in LDL-C levels during the acute and subacute phases after PCSK9 inhibitor administration were compared between the evolocumab and alirocumab groups. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Among 80 patients diagnosed with ACS, 36 received evolocumab, while 44 were treated with alirocumab. The mean baseline LDL-C level was 123 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 128 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.456). In the subacute phase, the mean follow-up LDL-C levels were 47.05 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 49.5 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.585). The mean percentage reduction in LDL-C levels during the subacute phase was 60.41% in the evolocumab group and 58.51% in the alirocumab group (p=0.431). These differences were not statistically significant. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			No significant differences were observed between evolocumab and alirocumab. LDL-C levels exhibited a similar trend, characterized by a rapid decline in the acute phase, followed by a slight rebound in the subacute phase. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
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.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.Early effects of PCSK9 inhibitors: evolocumab versus alirocumab
Su-Hyun BAE ; Bong-Joon KIM ; Soo-Jin KIM ; Sung-Il IM ; Hyun-Su KIM ; Jung-Ho HEO
Kosin Medical Journal 2025;40(1):49-54
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			The significance of risk modification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is well recognized; however, the optimal timing for adminstering PCSK9 inhibitors remains unclear. Additionally, the lipid-lowering efficacy of evolocumab and alirocumab has not been fully established. This study evaluated the lipid-lowering effects of these two PCSK9 inhibitors. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Patients diagnosed with ACS, including unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who were treated with a PCSK9 inhibitor (evolocumab or alirocumab) during hospitalization for ACS between 2021 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed, and changes in LDL-C levels during the acute and subacute phases after PCSK9 inhibitor administration were compared between the evolocumab and alirocumab groups. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Among 80 patients diagnosed with ACS, 36 received evolocumab, while 44 were treated with alirocumab. The mean baseline LDL-C level was 123 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 128 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.456). In the subacute phase, the mean follow-up LDL-C levels were 47.05 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 49.5 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.585). The mean percentage reduction in LDL-C levels during the subacute phase was 60.41% in the evolocumab group and 58.51% in the alirocumab group (p=0.431). These differences were not statistically significant. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			No significant differences were observed between evolocumab and alirocumab. LDL-C levels exhibited a similar trend, characterized by a rapid decline in the acute phase, followed by a slight rebound in the subacute phase. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
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.Early effects of PCSK9 inhibitors: evolocumab versus alirocumab
Su-Hyun BAE ; Bong-Joon KIM ; Soo-Jin KIM ; Sung-Il IM ; Hyun-Su KIM ; Jung-Ho HEO
Kosin Medical Journal 2025;40(1):49-54
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			The significance of risk modification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is well recognized; however, the optimal timing for adminstering PCSK9 inhibitors remains unclear. Additionally, the lipid-lowering efficacy of evolocumab and alirocumab has not been fully established. This study evaluated the lipid-lowering effects of these two PCSK9 inhibitors. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			Patients diagnosed with ACS, including unstable angina, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who were treated with a PCSK9 inhibitor (evolocumab or alirocumab) during hospitalization for ACS between 2021 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed, and changes in LDL-C levels during the acute and subacute phases after PCSK9 inhibitor administration were compared between the evolocumab and alirocumab groups. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			Among 80 patients diagnosed with ACS, 36 received evolocumab, while 44 were treated with alirocumab. The mean baseline LDL-C level was 123 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 128 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.456). In the subacute phase, the mean follow-up LDL-C levels were 47.05 mg/dL in the evolocumab group and 49.5 mg/dL in the alirocumab group (p=0.585). The mean percentage reduction in LDL-C levels during the subacute phase was 60.41% in the evolocumab group and 58.51% in the alirocumab group (p=0.431). These differences were not statistically significant. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusions
		                        			No significant differences were observed between evolocumab and alirocumab. LDL-C levels exhibited a similar trend, characterized by a rapid decline in the acute phase, followed by a slight rebound in the subacute phase. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
9.Genetic Landscape and Clinical Manifestations of Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1 in a Korean Cohort: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis
Boram KIM ; Seung Hun LEE ; Chang Ho AHN ; Han Na JANG ; Sung Im CHO ; Jee-Soo LEE ; Yu-Mi LEE ; Su-Jin KIM ; Tae-Yon SUNG ; Kyu Eun LEE ; Woochang LEE ; Jung-Min KOH ; Moon-Woo SEONG ; Jung Hee KIM
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2024;39(6):956-964
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is an autosomal dominant disorder characterized by tumors in multiple endocrine organs, caused by variants in the MEN1 gene. This study analyzed the clinical and genetic features of MEN1 in a Korean cohort, identifying prevalent manifestations and genetic variants, including novel variants. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			This multicenter retrospective study reviewed the medical records of 117 MEN1 patients treated at three tertiary centers in Korea between January 2012 and September 2022. Patient demographics, tumor manifestations, outcomes, and MEN1 genetic testing results were collected. Variants were classified using American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and French Oncogenetics Network of Neuroendocrine Tumors propositions (TENGEN) guidelines. 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			A total of 117 patients were enrolled, including 55 familial cases, with a mean age at diagnosis of 37.4±15.3 years. Primary hyperparathyroidism was identified as the most common presentation (84.6%). The prevalence of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET) was 77.8% (n=91) and 56.4% (n=66), respectively. Genetic testing revealed 61 distinct MEN1 variants in 101 patients, with 18 being novel. Four variants were reclassified according to the TENGEN guidelines. Patients with truncating variants (n=72) exhibited a higher prevalence of PitNETs compared to those with non-truncating variants (n=25) (59.7% vs. 36.0%, P=0.040). 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusion
		                        			The association between truncating variants and an increased prevalence of PitNETs in MEN1 underscores the importance of genetic characterization in guiding the clinical management of this disease. Our study sheds light on the clinical and genetic characteristics of MEN1 among the Korean population. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
10.Evaluation of Erosive Potential of Powdered Vitamin C on Bovine Teeth
Ha-Rin KIM ; Im-Hee JUNG ; Ye-Jin KIM ; Na-Ra MIN ; Ye-Jin SEO ; Yeo-Jin LEE ; Eun-Bi LEE ; Su-Min HAN ; Hee-Jung LIM ; Do-Seon LIM
Journal of Dental Hygiene Science 2024;24(4):391-399
		                        		
		                        			 Background:
		                        			This study aimed to investigate the erosive potential of powdered vitamin C on the bovine enamel tooth surface. 
		                        		
		                        			Methods:
		                        			The experiment included five groups: Lemona, Vitagran, Korea Eundan, Coca-Cola (positive controls), and artificialsaliva (negative controls). The pH and titratable acidity were measured. Bovine enamel specimens were immersed in the experimental solutions for 15 minutes each day for 7 days. The surface microhardness was measured using the Vickers hardness number before immersion and on the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th days. The surfaces of the bovine enamel specimens were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). 
		                        		
		                        			Results:
		                        			The pH of the experimental groups was as follows: Lemona (2.04±0.04) had the lowest pH, followed by Vitagran(2.56±0.01), the positive control group Coca-Cola (2.60±0.03), Korea Eundan (3.14±0.02), and the negative control group artificial saliva (7.06±0.05). Surface microhardness decreased significantly during the immersion period (p<0.001). The largest surface microhardness reduction value was shown in Lemona (–201.22±20.60), followed by Vitagran (–190.02±14.73), Korea Eundan (–189.27±27.14), Coca-Cola (–99.28±17.21), artificial saliva (–10.99±9.94). According to the SEM findings, the experimental and positive control groups exhibited rough surfaces with micropores, whereas the negative control group exhibited smooth surfaces before specimen immersion. 
		                        		
		                        			Conclusion
		                        			Consuming powdered vitamin C at a low pH may degrade the enamel surface. To reduce the erosive effect, it isrecommended to rinse the mouth with water and brush the teeth after an hour. 
		                        		
		                        		
		                        		
		                        	
            
Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail