Rectal cancer, which accounts for approximately 40% of colorectal cancers, remains a major clinical concern. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging, surgical techniques, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment have steadily improved rectal cancer outcomes. Considering this, the Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary (KRCM) Committee has aimed to provide clinicians and policymakers with up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to support optimal decision-making, reflecting current evidence, the Korean healthcare context, and patient values and preferences. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0 were developed through multidisciplinary collaboration with related academic societies, building upon and updating the KRCM Clinical Practice Guidelines version 1.0 (titled “Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of rectal cancer”). These consensus guidelines of the KRCM were established based on a comprehensive literature review, evidence synthesis, with recommendation development guided by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and consideration of applicability in real-world clinical practice under the national health insurance system. Each recommendation has been presented with its strength and level of evidence.

Pharmacogenomic variations may significantly influence responses to commonly prescribed stroke medications. Despite accumulating evidence, genetic testing has not yet been widely integrated into stroke care. This review summarizes current evidence and provides practical guidance for clinical implementation. Pharmacogenomic studies and clinical guidelines related to antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants, and statins were reviewed, with particular emphasis on East Asian populations. Substantial evidence supports genotype-guided use of clopidogrel (CYP2C19), warfarin (CYP2C9, VKORC1, CYP4F2), and statins (SLCO1B1, ABCG2). For aspirin, PTGS1/2 and PEAR1 variants have been investigated; however, current data remain insufficient for clinical application. Regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), candidate genes such as ABCB1 and CES1 demonstrate pharmacokinetic associations, though robust clinical outcome data are lacking. Distinct allele frequencies in East Asians—such as higher prevalence of CYP2C19 and ABCG2 variants—underscore the need for population-specific strategies. Beyond single-gene approaches, polygenic risk scores, pharmacogenomic panels, and integration with multi-omics data and artificial intelligence represent promising directions for personalized therapy. Pharmacogenomic testing can enhance stroke pharmacotherapy, particularly in populations with high frequencies of actionable variants. Broader implementation requires rapid testing platforms, clinician education, tailored clinical guidelines, and real-world validation of aspirin, DOACs, and multi-gene approaches. Future research should expand population-specific studies and integrate pharmacogenomics within the broader framework of precision medicine to ensure equitable clinical benefit.

Objective: To classify life stages for companion dogs and cats by identifying clusters in age-specific disease proportions derived from medical records, providing a data-driven foundation for health examination programs. Methods: We collected 505,667 medical records from 82 veterinary facilities in South Korea between 2020 and 2023. Diagnoses were standardized using GPT-4o and S-BioBERT. Following preprocessing, data from 27 facilities yielded 222,706 canine and 39,910 feline records for the final analysis. Principal component analysis and K-means clustering (K = 4) were applied to age-specific disease proportions to identify life stages.The 10 most highest-proportion diagnoses diseases were determined for each cluster. Results: Canine life stages were classified as ≤ 1 year, 2–5 years, 6–10 years, and 11–15+ years.Feline life stages were 1–2 years, 3–8 years, 9–12 years, and 13–15+ years. In dogs, developmental diseases were common in the youngest age group, while chronic diseases were more prevalent in older groups. In cats, oral and urinary diseases were high-ranking, conjunctivitis was most common in the early stage, and chronic diseases increased with age. Conclusions and Relevance: Age-specific diagnosis patterns support four practical life stages for dogs and cats in South Korea. These boundaries can inform evidence-based preventive examination schedules, animal health policy, and pet insurance product design.

Objectives: Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable potential in healthcare communication. However, whether they can process complex, high-volume medical information, such as stroke-related content, remains insufficiently validated. This study aimed to evaluate the natural language processing capabilities of LLMs in handling such content and to develop an evaluation instrument. Methods: A survey compared educational materials generated by two LLMs (ChatGPT 4.0 and Claude 3) with neurologist-authored content on stroke. The materials were based on two clinical scenarios representing distinct stroke etiologies: cardioembolism and large-artery atherosclerosis. They were evaluated in terms of accuracy, legality, ethics, comprehensiveness, and information delivery. Scores for comprehensiveness and information delivery were compared according to participants’ agreement with the use of LLMs in healthcare. Results: ChatGPT received the highest scores across all domains, except for legality in Scenario 2. In Scenario 1, the ranking for accuracy and summarization of clinical information was, from highest to lowest, ChatGPT, Claude, and the neurologist (η2 = 0.140, p < 0.001; η2 = 0.175, p < 0.001). The same hierarchy was observed in Scenario 2 for accuracy (η2 = 0.077, p < 0.001) and summarization (η2 = 0.194, p < 0.001). Participants who agreed with the use of LLMs in healthcare assigned higher scores for the comprehensiveness (Scenario 1, p = 0.005; Scenario 2, p = 0.007) and information delivery (Scenario 1, p = 0.003; Scenario 2, p = 0.026) of ChatGPT-generated materials than participants who did not agree. Conclusions LLMs demonstrated adequate capability to convey complex content, such as stroke-related information, in an accessible and understandable manner for non-experts.

Background: Cough is a prominent symptom of chronic respiratory diseases, including asthma, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and bronchiectasis (BE). Some patients develop chronic cough (CC), defined as lasting more than 8 weeks, yet its characteristics remain poorly understood. This study aimed to characterize CC across various chronic respiratory diseases using validated cough assessment tools. Methods: The Cough Assessment in Chronic Respiratory Diseases (COASESS) study, a multicenter, prospective cross-sectional study, was conducted at 10 university hospitals. CC was evaluated in terms of intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]), frequency (cough symptom score [CSS]), and quality of life (using the cough assessment test [COAT] and Leicester cough questionnaire [LCQ]). Cough hypersensitivity was assessed with the cough hypersensitivity questionnaire (CHQ). Data on age, sex, and smoking status were also collected. Results: Among the 303 enrolled patients, 266 with chronic respiratory diseases were included in the analysis. Patients with asthma were younger, predominantly female, and non-smokers, whereas those with COPD and IPF were older males who had previously smoked (p<0.001). Scores for COAT, LCQ, NRS, and CSS showed significant differences across the diseases, with asthma and IPF patients experiencing a greater symptom burden and lower quality of life compared to those with COPD or BE (p<0.001). Although CHQ total scores were similar across groups, asthma patients more frequently reported triggers such as talking and post-nasal drip. Conclusion This study revealed distinct characteristics of CC across different chronic respiratory diseases. Asthma and IPF were associated with a higher symptom burden, and cough hypersensitivity varied depending on the underlying condition. These findings highlight the necessity for disease-specific assessments and management strategies for CC.

The sixth edition of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder (KMAP-DD) was published in 2025. This review compared KMAP-DD 2025 with four major international clinical practice guidelines: Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Major Depressive Disorders, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Depression Guideline, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists Clinical Practice Guidelines for Mood Disorders, and British Association for Psychopharmacology Guideline. While KMAP-DD is based on expert consensus, and others on evidence-based methods, overall treatment strategies for depressive episodes were fairly consistent. Especially, KMAP-DD 2025 offers more structured recommendations in areas lacking strong evidence, such as premenstrual dysphoric disorder, perinatal depression, and depression with medical comorbidities. KMAP-DD 2025 also reflected Korean clinical practice patterns emphasizing rapid symptom relief and early use of combination strategies. Despite limitations as a consensus-based guideline, KMAP-DD 2025 complements evidence-based approaches and provides practical, situation-specific guidance for real-world clinical decision-making in Korea.

In patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), initial recurrence risk stratification based on clinical, histopathological, and perioperative data remains the key determinant for guiding management strategies during the first 1-2 years post-treatment. However, the adoption of ongoing risk stratification (ORS), which dynamically reassesses risk by integrating longitudinal clinical data and treatment response, enables more precise long-term prognostic assessment and facilitates highly individualized management. Building upon recent guidelines, the 2026 KTA guideline has been further refined by incorporating robust evidence from large-scale national cohorts and comprehensive systematic reviews. These updated recommendations outline contemporary concepts of ORS, risk-adapted TSH suppression targets, optimized surveillance modalities for recurrence detection, and disease-specific long-term follow-up strategies. Reflecting the paradigm shift toward de-escalated treatment, this revision integrates evolved perspectives on TSH suppression intensity, the clinical interpretation of thyroglobulin levels, and tailored follow-up intervals. These evidence-based recommendations aim to minimize unnecessary treatment and excessive surveillance in the large proportion of patients with excellent prognosis after initial therapy, while ensuring that each patient receives appropriately tailored and effective long-term management.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background: Residents and nurses who activate rapid response teams (RRTs) are well positioned to offer insights on its effectiveness. Here, we assess such evaluation of RRTs and identify barriers to activation in a 1,400-bed teaching hospital. Methods: We conducted a 24-item Likert-scale survey from January to May 2017 among residents and ward nurses with RRT experience. Factor analysis was used to identify the barriers. Results: This study comprised 305 nurses and 53 residents, most of whom were satisfied with their RRT experiences. Factor analysis showed that lack of awareness of activation criteria was a major barrier, with only 21.4% and 22.2% participants, respectively, confident about their knowledge of activation protocols. Of the survey respondents, 85.7% reported first contacting the doctor before activating the RRT. Despite the protocol, 66.7% first discussed the decision with other staff, and 71.5% called the RRT when the patient’s condition worsened despite management. Conclusions Nurses and residents value RRTs but face barriers in initiation, primarily due to a lack of confidence in applying the activation criteria. Many prefer to consult a doctor or manage the patient before calling the RRT.