1.Prospective Multicenter Observational Study on Postoperative Quality of Life According to Type of Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
Sung Eun OH ; Yun-Suhk SUH ; Ji Yeong AN ; Keun Won RYU ; In CHO ; Sung Geun KIM ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Hoon HUR ; Hyung-Ho KIM ; Sang-Hoon AHN ; Sun-Hwi HWANG ; Hong Man YOON ; Ki Bum PARK ; Hyoung-Il KIM ; In Gyu KWON ; Han-Kwang YANG ; Byoung-Jo SUH ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Tae-Han KIM ; Oh Kyoung KWON ; Hye Seong AHN ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Ki Young YOON ; Myoung Won SON ; Seong-Ho KONG ; Young-Gil SON ; Geum Jong SONG ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Jung-Min BAE ; Do Joong PARK ; Sol LEE ; Jun-Young YANG ; Kyung Won SEO ; You-Jin JANG ; So Hyun KANG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Joongyub LEE ; Hyuk-Joon LEE ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):382-399
Purpose:
This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Materials and Methods:
A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
Results:
Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064).
Conclusions
Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.
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.Prospective Multicenter Observational Study on Postoperative Quality of Life According to Type of Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
Sung Eun OH ; Yun-Suhk SUH ; Ji Yeong AN ; Keun Won RYU ; In CHO ; Sung Geun KIM ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Hoon HUR ; Hyung-Ho KIM ; Sang-Hoon AHN ; Sun-Hwi HWANG ; Hong Man YOON ; Ki Bum PARK ; Hyoung-Il KIM ; In Gyu KWON ; Han-Kwang YANG ; Byoung-Jo SUH ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Tae-Han KIM ; Oh Kyoung KWON ; Hye Seong AHN ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Ki Young YOON ; Myoung Won SON ; Seong-Ho KONG ; Young-Gil SON ; Geum Jong SONG ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Jung-Min BAE ; Do Joong PARK ; Sol LEE ; Jun-Young YANG ; Kyung Won SEO ; You-Jin JANG ; So Hyun KANG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Joongyub LEE ; Hyuk-Joon LEE ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):382-399
Purpose:
This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Materials and Methods:
A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
Results:
Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064).
Conclusions
Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.
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.Prospective Multicenter Observational Study on Postoperative Quality of Life According to Type of Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
Sung Eun OH ; Yun-Suhk SUH ; Ji Yeong AN ; Keun Won RYU ; In CHO ; Sung Geun KIM ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Hoon HUR ; Hyung-Ho KIM ; Sang-Hoon AHN ; Sun-Hwi HWANG ; Hong Man YOON ; Ki Bum PARK ; Hyoung-Il KIM ; In Gyu KWON ; Han-Kwang YANG ; Byoung-Jo SUH ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Tae-Han KIM ; Oh Kyoung KWON ; Hye Seong AHN ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Ki Young YOON ; Myoung Won SON ; Seong-Ho KONG ; Young-Gil SON ; Geum Jong SONG ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Jung-Min BAE ; Do Joong PARK ; Sol LEE ; Jun-Young YANG ; Kyung Won SEO ; You-Jin JANG ; So Hyun KANG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Joongyub LEE ; Hyuk-Joon LEE ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):382-399
Purpose:
This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Materials and Methods:
A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.
Results:
Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064).
Conclusions
Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.
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.Local Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2024 Expert Consensus-Based Practical Recommendations of the Korean Liver Cancer Association
Seungchul HAN ; Pil Soo SUNG ; Soo Young PARK ; Jin Woong KIM ; Hyun Pyo HONG ; Jung-Hee YOON ; Dong Jin CHUNG ; Joon Ho KWON ; Sanghyeok LIM ; Jae Hyun KIM ; Seung Kak SHIN ; Tae Hyung KIM ; Dong Ho LEE ; Jong Young CHOI ; Research Committee of the Korean Liver Cancer Association
Gut and Liver 2024;18(5):789-802
Local ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma, a non-surgical option that directly targets and destroys tumor cells, has advanced significantly since the 1990s. Therapies with different energy sources, such as radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation, employ different mechanisms to induce tumor necrosis. The precision, safety, and effectiveness of these therapies have increased with advances in guiding technologies and device improvements.Consequently, local ablation has become the first-line treatment for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. The lack of organized evidence and expert opinions regarding patient selection, preprocedure preparation, procedural methods, swift post-treatment evaluation, and follow-up has resulted in clinicians following varied practices. Therefore, an expert consensus-based practical recommendation for local ablation was developed by a group of experts in radiology and hepatology from the Research Committee of the Korean Liver Cancer Association in collaboration with the Korean Society of Image-Guided Tumor Ablation to provide useful information and guidance for performing local ablation and for the pre- and post-treatment management of patients.
8.Clinicopathological Features and Oncological Outcomes of Germline Partner and Localizer of Breast Cancer 2-Mutated Breast Cancer in Korea
Chayanee SAE-LIM ; Seongyeon JO ; Shinyoung PARK ; Taeyong KWEON ; Jeea LEE ; Yoonjung LEE ; Sun Hwa LEE ; Dongju WON ; Eun Ji NAM ; Jung Woo HAN ; Tae Il KIM ; Ji Soo PARK ; Hyung Seok PARK
Journal of Breast Cancer 2024;27(6):372-382
Purpose:
The partner and localizer of breast cancer 2 (PALB2) mutation is a predisposition to breast cancer development. However, limited clinical data are available for the Korean population. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the characteristics and oncological outcomes of patients with PALB2-mutated and non-mutated PALB2 in Korea.
Methods:
A total of 1,463 breast cancer (BRCA) 1/2 mutation-negative breast cancer underwent comprehensive multigene sequencing between 2016 and 2019 at Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Clinicopathological data and oncological results of PALB2 mutated patients were prospectively collected and compared with those of the non-mutated group.
Results:
PALB2 mutations were identified in 1.2% (17/1,463) of the patients. The median age at diagnosis was 46 (30–73) years, and the median tumor size was 1.8 (0.05–3.5) cm. All patients with PALB2 mutations had histologic grades II–III, and a triple-negative subtype was found in 23.5% (4/17); however, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological data between the groups. During the median follow-up time of 38.5 months, locoregional recurrence occurred in 4.2% (44/1,043), distant recurrence was reported in 3.0% (31/1,043), and contralateral breast cancer was diagnosed in 0.8% (9/1,043) of patients, with no significant difference observed between the groups. All-cause mortality was observed in 1.8% (19/1,028) of the non-mutated group and none in the PALB2 mutation group. However, survival analyses demonstrated no significant differences in all-cause mortality (p = 0.524) and recurrence-free survival (p = 0.319).
Conclusion
Clinicopathological features and oncological outcomes of PALB2 mutated breast cancer were not significantly different from those of non-mutated breast cancer in the Korean population.
9.Clinicopathological Features and Oncological Outcomes of Germline Partner and Localizer of Breast Cancer 2-Mutated Breast Cancer in Korea
Chayanee SAE-LIM ; Seongyeon JO ; Shinyoung PARK ; Taeyong KWEON ; Jeea LEE ; Yoonjung LEE ; Sun Hwa LEE ; Dongju WON ; Eun Ji NAM ; Jung Woo HAN ; Tae Il KIM ; Ji Soo PARK ; Hyung Seok PARK
Journal of Breast Cancer 2024;27(6):372-382
Purpose:
The partner and localizer of breast cancer 2 (PALB2) mutation is a predisposition to breast cancer development. However, limited clinical data are available for the Korean population. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the characteristics and oncological outcomes of patients with PALB2-mutated and non-mutated PALB2 in Korea.
Methods:
A total of 1,463 breast cancer (BRCA) 1/2 mutation-negative breast cancer underwent comprehensive multigene sequencing between 2016 and 2019 at Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Clinicopathological data and oncological results of PALB2 mutated patients were prospectively collected and compared with those of the non-mutated group.
Results:
PALB2 mutations were identified in 1.2% (17/1,463) of the patients. The median age at diagnosis was 46 (30–73) years, and the median tumor size was 1.8 (0.05–3.5) cm. All patients with PALB2 mutations had histologic grades II–III, and a triple-negative subtype was found in 23.5% (4/17); however, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological data between the groups. During the median follow-up time of 38.5 months, locoregional recurrence occurred in 4.2% (44/1,043), distant recurrence was reported in 3.0% (31/1,043), and contralateral breast cancer was diagnosed in 0.8% (9/1,043) of patients, with no significant difference observed between the groups. All-cause mortality was observed in 1.8% (19/1,028) of the non-mutated group and none in the PALB2 mutation group. However, survival analyses demonstrated no significant differences in all-cause mortality (p = 0.524) and recurrence-free survival (p = 0.319).
Conclusion
Clinicopathological features and oncological outcomes of PALB2 mutated breast cancer were not significantly different from those of non-mutated breast cancer in the Korean population.
10.Clinicopathological Features and Oncological Outcomes of Germline Partner and Localizer of Breast Cancer 2-Mutated Breast Cancer in Korea
Chayanee SAE-LIM ; Seongyeon JO ; Shinyoung PARK ; Taeyong KWEON ; Jeea LEE ; Yoonjung LEE ; Sun Hwa LEE ; Dongju WON ; Eun Ji NAM ; Jung Woo HAN ; Tae Il KIM ; Ji Soo PARK ; Hyung Seok PARK
Journal of Breast Cancer 2024;27(6):372-382
Purpose:
The partner and localizer of breast cancer 2 (PALB2) mutation is a predisposition to breast cancer development. However, limited clinical data are available for the Korean population. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the characteristics and oncological outcomes of patients with PALB2-mutated and non-mutated PALB2 in Korea.
Methods:
A total of 1,463 breast cancer (BRCA) 1/2 mutation-negative breast cancer underwent comprehensive multigene sequencing between 2016 and 2019 at Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Clinicopathological data and oncological results of PALB2 mutated patients were prospectively collected and compared with those of the non-mutated group.
Results:
PALB2 mutations were identified in 1.2% (17/1,463) of the patients. The median age at diagnosis was 46 (30–73) years, and the median tumor size was 1.8 (0.05–3.5) cm. All patients with PALB2 mutations had histologic grades II–III, and a triple-negative subtype was found in 23.5% (4/17); however, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological data between the groups. During the median follow-up time of 38.5 months, locoregional recurrence occurred in 4.2% (44/1,043), distant recurrence was reported in 3.0% (31/1,043), and contralateral breast cancer was diagnosed in 0.8% (9/1,043) of patients, with no significant difference observed between the groups. All-cause mortality was observed in 1.8% (19/1,028) of the non-mutated group and none in the PALB2 mutation group. However, survival analyses demonstrated no significant differences in all-cause mortality (p = 0.524) and recurrence-free survival (p = 0.319).
Conclusion
Clinicopathological features and oncological outcomes of PALB2 mutated breast cancer were not significantly different from those of non-mutated breast cancer in the Korean population.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail