Sang-Yoon Park

Dr. Sang-Yoon Park


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 February 2006 in Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HCHyuck Jae Choi
Hyuck Jae Choi
JRJu-Won Roh
Ju-Won Roh
SSSang Soo Seo
Sang Soo Seo
SLSun Lee
Sun Lee
Jooyoung KimJooyoung Kim
Jooyoung Kim
SPSang-Yoon Park
Sang-Yoon Park
BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to determine the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for detecting lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma compared with thin‐section histopathologic results from systemic lymphadenectomy.METHODS: Twenty‐two patients with International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) Stage IB–IVA cervical carcinoma who underwent both MRI and PET/CT before lymphadenectomy were included in this study. Lymphadenectomy involved removing all visible lymph nodes in the surgical fields. To enable region‐specific comparisons, paraaortic and pelvic lymph nodes were divided into seven regions: the paraaortic area, both common iliac areas, both external iliac areas, and both internal iliac/obturator areas. Histopathologic evaluation of lymph nodes was the diagnostic standard. Chi‐square analysis was used to compare the accuracy of MRI and PET/CT for the detection of metastatic lymph nodes. A P value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.RESULTS: With MRI, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates for detecting metastatic lymph nodes in each lymph node group were 30.3% (10 of 33 lymph node groups), 92.6% (112 of 121 lymph node groups), and 72.7% (122 of 154 lymph node groups), respectively; with PET/CT, those rates were 57.6% (19 of 33 lymph node groups), 92.6% (112 of 121 lymph node groups), and 85.1% (131 of 154 lymph node groups), respectively. Statistical analysis showed that PET/CT was more sensitive than MRI (P = 0.026) but that there were no statistical differences noted with regard to specificity (P = 1.000) or accuracy (P = 0.180). Power analysis demonstrated that a sample size of 685 lymph node groups (98 patients) would be necessary to demonstrate that PET/CT was more accurate than MRI (α = 0.05; β = 0.80).CONCLUSIONS: PET/CT was more sensitive than MRI for detecting lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma. Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society.

9 March 2022 in JAMA Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MLMyong Cheol Lim
Myong Cheol Lim
SCSuk-Joon Chang
Suk-Joon Chang
BPBoram Park
Boram Park
HYHeon Jong Yoo
Heon Jong Yoo
CYChong Woo Yoo
Chong Woo Yoo
RBRobert E Bristow
Robert E Bristow
Women with ovarian, fallopian, and primary peritoneal cancer are frequently diagnosed with peritoneal carcinomatosis, which has the highest mortality rate among gynecologic malignant tumors with an age-standardized, 5-year net survival rate of 37% to 43%.1,2 The standard treatment involves maximal cytoreductive surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy to minimize the residual tumor size.3 Moreover, neoadjuvant chemotherapy can also be used in selected patient populations with severe medical illness or unresectable tumor burden.3 Intraperitoneal chemotherapy increases progression-free and overall survival among patients with ovarian cancer who undergo cytoreductive surgery for a residual tumor size of less than 1 cm.3,4 The survival benefits of intraperitoneal chemotherapy extend for more than 10 years.5 However, despite the long-term survival benefits, port-related adverse effects, abdominal pain, and additional effort required for the management of an intraperitoneal catheter limit the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy.6

29 May 2018 in BMC Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJung-Yun Lee
Jung-Yun Lee
Sung-Hoon KimSung-Hoon Kim
Sung-Hoon Kim
Do Young KimDo Young Kim
Do Young Kim
MLMyong Cheol Lim
Myong Cheol Lim
BLBoram Lee
Boram Lee
YWYoung-Joo Won
Young-Joo Won
The survival of patients with ovarian cancer has improved because of surgery and chemotherapy. This study aimed to estimate the changes in survival rates among Korean women with ovarian cancer prior to the introduction of targeted therapy for ovarian cancer. Data were obtained from the Korea Central Cancer Registry regarding patients who were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer between 1995 and 2014. The relative survival rates were calculated for 5-year periods using the Ederer II method. Cox proportional hazard models were created to assess the associations of demographic and clinicopathological factors with ovarian cancer survival. During the study period, 22,880 women were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer. The 5-year relative survival rate improved from 57.2% during 1995–1999 to 63.8% during 2010–2014 (P < 0.001). Survival outcomes improved between 1995 and 1999 and 2010–2014 for the serous and endometrioid carcinoma subtypes (P < 0.001). However, no improvements were observed for the mucinous and clear cell carcinoma subtypes (P = 0.189 and P = 0.293, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that younger age, early stage, recent diagnosis, primary surgical treatment, and non-serous histological subtype were favorable prognostic factors. Survival outcomes have improved for serous and endometrioid epithelial ovarian cancer in the last 20 years. However, no improvement was observed for patients with mucinous and clear cell carcinoma subtypes.

1 October 2008 in International Journal of Gynecological Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JPJeong-Yeol Park
Jeong-Yeol Park
JBJ. Bae
J. Bae
MLMyong Cheol Lim
Myong Cheol Lim
SLS.Y. Lim
S.Y. Lim
SSS.-S. Seo
S.-S. Seo
SPSang-Yoon Park
Sang-Yoon Park

1 August 2021 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JCJune Young Chun
June Young Chun
SKSe Ik Kim
Se Ik Kim
EPEun Young Park
Eun Young Park
SPSang-Yoon Park
Sang-Yoon Park
SKSu-Jin Koh
Su-Jin Koh
MLMyong Cheol Lim
Myong Cheol Lim
Considering the high morbidity and mortality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with malignancy, they are regarded as a priority for COVID-19 vaccination. However, general vaccine uptake rates among cancer patients are known to be lower than in their healthy counterparts. Thus, we aimed to investigate the attitude and acceptance rates for the COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients and identify predictive factors for vaccination that could be modified to increase vaccine uptake rates, via a paper-based survey (58 items over six domains). A total of 1001 cancer patients participated in this nationwide, multicenter survey between February and April 2021. We observed that 61.8% of respondents were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Positive predictive factors found to be independently associated with vaccination were male gender, older age, obesity, previous influenza vaccination history, absence of cancer recurrence, time since cancer diagnosis over 5 years, and higher EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale scores. Along with the well-known factors that are positively correlated with vaccination, here, we report that patients’ disease status and current health status were also associated with their acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, 91.2% of cancer patients were willing to be vaccinated if their attending physicians recommend it, indicating that almost 30% could change their decision upon physicians’ recommendation. Unlike other factors, which are unmodifiable, physicians’ recommendation is the single modifiable factor that could change patients’ behavior. In conclusion, we firstly report that Korean cancer patients’ acceptance rate of the COVID-19 vaccination was 61.8% and associated with disease status and current health status. Physicians should play a major role in aiding cancer patients’ decision-making concerning COVID-19 vaccines.

1 January 2015 in Journal of Gynecologic Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JRJu-Won Roh
Ju-Won Roh
DLDong Ock Lee
Dong Ock Lee
DSDong Hoon Suh
Dong Hoon Suh
MLMyong Cheol Lim
Myong Cheol Lim
SSSang-Soo Seo
Sang-Soo Seo
SPSang-Yoon Park
Sang-Yoon Park
Roh JW, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Apr;26(2):90-99. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2015.26.2.90