Background/Aims: The proposed eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) endoscopic reference score serves to diagnose and evaluate treatment responses in EoE.Nevertheless, the validated reference score thresholds for diagnosis and treatment response in Asian patients are yet to be established.This study aims to establish these thresholds for the first time among Asian patients with EoE. Methods: Patients presenting with ≥ 15 eosinophils/high power field and esophageal dysfunction symptoms between August 2007 andNovember 2021 were included. Age- and sex-matched non-EoE controls were also enrolled. Baseline characteristics, endoscopic reference score features, and scores were compared between patients and controls. Among patients, endoscopic reference score features and scores, along with peak eosinophil counts, were evaluated both before and after treatment. The optimal threshold was determined based on sensitivity, specificity, and the Youden index. Results: Overall, 102 patients were enrolled (74.5% men; mean age, 46.9 years). The mean endoscopic reference score was 2.65 and 0.52 for patients and controls, respectively (P < 0.001). An endoscopic reference score ≥ 2 was identified as the optimal diagnostic threshold for EoE (sensitivity, 0.79; specificity, 0.86; Youden index, 0.66). Post-treatment data regarding endoscopic findings and histology wereavailable for 30 patients. Regarding histologic response, an endoscopic reference score of ≤ 3 demonstrated the optimal threshold(sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.88; Youden index, 0.83). Conclusions The optimal diagnostic and treatment response thresholds were determined to be endoscopic reference scores of ≥ 2 and ≤ 3,respectively. Further studies involving a larger patient cohort are necessary to validate these findings.

Background/Aims: The proposed eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) endoscopic reference score serves to diagnose and evaluate treatment responses in EoE.Nevertheless, the validated reference score thresholds for diagnosis and treatment response in Asian patients are yet to be established.This study aims to establish these thresholds for the first time among Asian patients with EoE. Methods: Patients presenting with ≥ 15 eosinophils/high power field and esophageal dysfunction symptoms between August 2007 andNovember 2021 were included. Age- and sex-matched non-EoE controls were also enrolled. Baseline characteristics, endoscopic reference score features, and scores were compared between patients and controls. Among patients, endoscopic reference score features and scores, along with peak eosinophil counts, were evaluated both before and after treatment. The optimal threshold was determined based on sensitivity, specificity, and the Youden index. Results: Overall, 102 patients were enrolled (74.5% men; mean age, 46.9 years). The mean endoscopic reference score was 2.65 and 0.52 for patients and controls, respectively (P < 0.001). An endoscopic reference score ≥ 2 was identified as the optimal diagnostic threshold for EoE (sensitivity, 0.79; specificity, 0.86; Youden index, 0.66). Post-treatment data regarding endoscopic findings and histology wereavailable for 30 patients. Regarding histologic response, an endoscopic reference score of ≤ 3 demonstrated the optimal threshold(sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.88; Youden index, 0.83). Conclusions The optimal diagnostic and treatment response thresholds were determined to be endoscopic reference scores of ≥ 2 and ≤ 3,respectively. Further studies involving a larger patient cohort are necessary to validate these findings.

Background/Aims: The proposed eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) endoscopic reference score serves to diagnose and evaluate treatment responses in EoE.Nevertheless, the validated reference score thresholds for diagnosis and treatment response in Asian patients are yet to be established.This study aims to establish these thresholds for the first time among Asian patients with EoE. Methods: Patients presenting with ≥ 15 eosinophils/high power field and esophageal dysfunction symptoms between August 2007 andNovember 2021 were included. Age- and sex-matched non-EoE controls were also enrolled. Baseline characteristics, endoscopic reference score features, and scores were compared between patients and controls. Among patients, endoscopic reference score features and scores, along with peak eosinophil counts, were evaluated both before and after treatment. The optimal threshold was determined based on sensitivity, specificity, and the Youden index. Results: Overall, 102 patients were enrolled (74.5% men; mean age, 46.9 years). The mean endoscopic reference score was 2.65 and 0.52 for patients and controls, respectively (P < 0.001). An endoscopic reference score ≥ 2 was identified as the optimal diagnostic threshold for EoE (sensitivity, 0.79; specificity, 0.86; Youden index, 0.66). Post-treatment data regarding endoscopic findings and histology wereavailable for 30 patients. Regarding histologic response, an endoscopic reference score of ≤ 3 demonstrated the optimal threshold(sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.88; Youden index, 0.83). Conclusions The optimal diagnostic and treatment response thresholds were determined to be endoscopic reference scores of ≥ 2 and ≤ 3,respectively. Further studies involving a larger patient cohort are necessary to validate these findings.

Educational evaluation involves data collection and the analysis of various education-related factors to make decisions that improve educational quality. Systematic educational evaluation is essential for enhancing the quality of education. This study reports a case of student-conducted process evaluation of a medical school’s student support system and the procedure for devising improvement plans. Sixteen Inje University College of Medicine students participated in the Education Evaluation Committee (IUCM-EEC) to understand the educational improvement process as learners and actively achieve improvement. The Quality Improvement Committee of the Inje University College of Medicine (IUCM-QIC) decided to reform its student support system based on a previous educational evaluation in 2019. The evaluation of the student support system was conducted for 10 months in 2021 by the student subcommittee, under the guidance of the IUCM-EEC. The CIPP (context-input-process-product) evaluation model was used for a systematic evaluation. Accordingly, the subcommittee developed evaluation criteria and indicators, and analyzed relevant data collected from surveys and the previous literature. For further recommendations and revision ideas, the student subcommittee members interviewed faculty members from six other medical schools and also conducted a focus group interview with the dean and vice deans of IUCM. Finally, the student subcommittee submitted a report to the IUCM-QIC. Communication with various stakeholders is essential for a successful evaluation process. In this case, students, as key stakeholders in education, evaluated the student support system. Their active participation helped improve their understanding of the evaluation process.

Background/Aims: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and Helicobacter pylori (HP) coinfection may synergistically induce severe inflammatory responses in the stomach tissue, increasing the risk of developing gastric cancer. We aimed to analyze the effect of EBV and HP coinfection on the clinicopathologic features and prognosis of gastric cancer, as well as to evaluate the role of EBV infection in non-gastric carcinoma with lymphoid stroma (non-GCLS). Methods: Overall, 956 patients who underwent surgery for gastric cancer between September 2014 and August 2015 were eligible and divided into groups, according to GCLS morphology, EBV infection, and HP infection. Clinicopathologic characteristics and oncologic outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: EBV and HP coinfection was significantly associated with male sex, proximal location, GCLS morphology, and equivocal p53 expression (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that EBV infection alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.362; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.996; p=0.049) and lower third location (HR, 0.624; 95% CI, 0.413 to 0.943; p=0.025) were inversely correlated with overall survival. During median follow-up period of 72 months, overall survival rate was not significantly different between the EBV and HP coinfection group and others (97.6% vs 86.8%, log-rank p=0.144). In non-GCLS patients (n=920), overall survival rate was not significantly different between the EBV infection group and others (96.9% vs 86.4%, log-rank p=0.126). Conclusions EBV and HP coinfection is not an independent prognostic factor for gastric cancer. EBV infection status, regardless of HP infection, affects the clinicopathologic features of all types of gastric cancer. However, it does not lead to a significant difference in overall survival of nonGCLS patients.

Background/Aims: Although an association between achalasia and esophageal cancer has been reported, whether achalasia confers a substantial increase in mortality is unknown. Moreover, the causes of death related to achalasia have not been investigated. We performed this nationwide, population-based cohort study on achalasia because no such study has been performed since the introduction of high-resolution manometry in 2008. Methods: This study was performed using data extracted from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, covering a 9-year period from 2009 to 2017. Control participants without a diagnostic code for achalasia were randomly selected and matched by sex and birth year at a case-to-control ratio of 1:4. Data on the cause of death from Statistics Korea were also analyzed. Results: The overall incidence of achalasia was 0.68 per 100,000 person-years, and the prevalence was 6.46 per 100,000 population. Patients with achalasia (n=3,063) had significantly higher adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for esophageal cancer (aHR, 3.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 9.22; p=0.017), pneumonia (aHR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.89 to 2.81; p<0.001), aspiration pneumonia (aHR, 3.92; 95% CI, 2.38 to 6.48; p<0.001), and mortality (aHR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.44 to 1.94; p<0.001). Esophageal cancer carried the highest mortality risk (aHR, 8.82; 95% CI, 2.35 to 33.16; p=0.001), while pneumonia had the highest non-cancer mortality risk (aHR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.31 to 3.96; p=0.004). Conclusions In this nationwide study, achalasia was associated with increased risk of mortality.Esophageal cancer and pneumonia were the most common comorbidities and the major causes of death in patients with achalasia.

Background/Aims: Data regarding the prognosis of early esophageal cancer are lacking. This study investigated the long-term outcomes and factors affecting the survival of patients with mucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (T1aESCC). Methods: We analyzed the clinical and tumor-specific parameters of 263 patients who received surgical resection (SR; n=63) or endoscopic resection (ER; n=200) for T1aESCC. Underlying comorbidities were scored using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to predict factors for OS. Results: Of the study patients (age, 64.5±8.0 years), the CCI was 1.0±1.4 in the ER group and 0.6±0.9 in the SR group (p=0.107). The 5-year OS rate during follow-up (54.4±20.4 months) was 85.7% (ER group, 86.8%; SR group, 82.4%; p=0.631). The cumulative 5-year incidence of esophageal cancer recurrence was 10.5% in the ER group (vs 0% in the SR group). The overall mortality rate was 12.9% (ER group, 12.0%; SR group, 15.9%; p=0.399). The most common cause of mortality was second primary cancers in the ER group (75%) and organ dysfunction or postoperative complications in the SR group (70%). According to multivariate analysis, only CCI was significantly associated with OS (p<0.001). The 5-year OS rate in patients with a CCI >2 and in those with a CCI ≤2 was 60.2% and 88.2%, respectively (p<0.001). The treatment method (ER vs SR) was not a significant affecting factor (p=0.238). Conclusions The long-term prognosis of patients with T1aESCC was significantly associated with underlying comorbidities.

Objectives: We aimed to examine the association between the relative preference for vegetables and meat and cancer incidence, in a population-based retrospective cohort in Korea. Methods: We included 10,148,131 participants (5,794,124 men; 4,354,007 women) who underwent national health screening between 2004 and 2005 from the National Health Information Database of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS-NHID). Participants were asked whether they preferred consuming 1) vegetables more often, 2) both vegetables and meat or 3) meat more often. Participants were followed up to Dec. 31, 2017. All cancer and eighteen common cancer cases were identified through the code from the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision. We estimated sexspecific relative risks and 95% confidence intervals, adjusting for age, body mass index, alcohol consumption, smoking, physical activity, and income level. Results: During an average follow-up of 12.4 years, 714,170 cancer cases were documented. In men, consuming meat more often was associated with lower risk of esophageal, liver, and stomach cancers, but higher risk of lung and kidney cancers. Consuming both vegetables and meat was associated with higher risk of prostate cancer, but with lower risk of esophageal, liver, and stomach cancers in men. In women, consuming meat more often was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer and breast, endometrial, and cervical cancers diagnosed before the age of 50. Consuming both vegetables and meat was associated with lower risk of liver cancer in women. Conclusions Our study suggests a potential link between vegetable and meat intake and cancer incidence in the Korean population. Further investigation on the association between the intake of specific types of vegetables and meat and cancer risk in Korean prospective cohort studies is needed.

Background/Aims: Data regarding the prognosis of early esophageal cancer are lacking. This study investigated the long-term outcomes and factors affecting the survival of patients with mucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (T1aESCC). Methods: We analyzed the clinical and tumor-specific parameters of 263 patients who received surgical resection (SR; n=63) or endoscopic resection (ER; n=200) for T1aESCC. Underlying comorbidities were scored using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to predict factors for OS. Results: Of the study patients (age, 64.5±8.0 years), the CCI was 1.0±1.4 in the ER group and 0.6±0.9 in the SR group (p=0.107). The 5-year OS rate during follow-up (54.4±20.4 months) was 85.7% (ER group, 86.8%; SR group, 82.4%; p=0.631). The cumulative 5-year incidence of esophageal cancer recurrence was 10.5% in the ER group (vs 0% in the SR group). The overall mortality rate was 12.9% (ER group, 12.0%; SR group, 15.9%; p=0.399). The most common cause of mortality was second primary cancers in the ER group (75%) and organ dysfunction or postoperative complications in the SR group (70%). According to multivariate analysis, only CCI was significantly associated with OS (p<0.001). The 5-year OS rate in patients with a CCI >2 and in those with a CCI ≤2 was 60.2% and 88.2%, respectively (p<0.001). The treatment method (ER vs SR) was not a significant affecting factor (p=0.238). Conclusions The long-term prognosis of patients with T1aESCC was significantly associated with underlying comorbidities.

Objectives: We aimed to examine the association between the relative preference for vegetables and meat and cancer incidence, in a population-based retrospective cohort in Korea. Methods: We included 10,148,131 participants (5,794,124 men; 4,354,007 women) who underwent national health screening between 2004 and 2005 from the National Health Information Database of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS-NHID). Participants were asked whether they preferred consuming 1) vegetables more often, 2) both vegetables and meat or 3) meat more often. Participants were followed up to Dec. 31, 2017. All cancer and eighteen common cancer cases were identified through the code from the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision. We estimated sexspecific relative risks and 95% confidence intervals, adjusting for age, body mass index, alcohol consumption, smoking, physical activity, and income level. Results: During an average follow-up of 12.4 years, 714,170 cancer cases were documented. In men, consuming meat more often was associated with lower risk of esophageal, liver, and stomach cancers, but higher risk of lung and kidney cancers. Consuming both vegetables and meat was associated with higher risk of prostate cancer, but with lower risk of esophageal, liver, and stomach cancers in men. In women, consuming meat more often was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer and breast, endometrial, and cervical cancers diagnosed before the age of 50. Consuming both vegetables and meat was associated with lower risk of liver cancer in women. Conclusions Our study suggests a potential link between vegetable and meat intake and cancer incidence in the Korean population. Further investigation on the association between the intake of specific types of vegetables and meat and cancer risk in Korean prospective cohort studies is needed.