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.

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.

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.

In recent years, next-generation sequencing (NGS)–based genetic testing has become crucial in cancer care. While its primary objective is to identify actionable genetic alterations to guide treatment decisions, its scope has broadened to encompass aiding in pathological diagnosis and exploring resistance mechanisms. With the ongoing expansion in NGS application and reliance, a compelling necessity arises for expert consensus on its application in solid cancers. To address this demand, the forthcoming recommendations not only provide pragmatic guidance for the clinical use of NGS but also systematically classify actionable genes based on specific cancer types. Additionally, these recommendations will incorporate expert perspectives on crucial biomarkers, ensuring informed decisions regarding circulating tumor DNA panel testing.

In recent years, next-generation sequencing (NGS)–based genetic testing has become crucial in cancer care. While its primary objective is to identify actionable genetic alterations to guide treatment decisions, its scope has broadened to encompass aiding in pathological diagnosis and exploring resistance mechanisms. With the ongoing expansion in NGS application and reliance, a compelling necessity arises for expert consensus on its application in solid cancers. To address this demand, the forthcoming recommendations not only provide pragmatic guidance for the clinical use of NGS but also systematically classify actionable genes based on specific cancer types. Additionally, these recommendations will incorporate expert perspectives on crucial biomarkers, ensuring informed decisions regarding circulating tumor DNA panel testing.

Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic destructive inflammatory bowel disease that affects young people and is associated with significant morbidity. The clinical spectrum and disease course of CD are heterogeneous and often difficult to predict based on the initial presentation. In this article, changes in the disease location, behavior, clinical course during long-term follow-up, and predictive factors are reviewed. Generally, four different patterns of clinical course are discussed: remission, stable disease, chronic relapsing disease, and chronic refractory disease. Understanding the long-term disease course of CD is mandatory to reveal the underlying pathophysiology of the disease and to move toward a more optimistic disease course, such as remission or stability, and less adverse outcomes or devastating sequelae.

Membranous obstruction of the inferior vena cava (MOVC) is a rare subset of Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) with a subacute onset that is often complicated by cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Here we report a case of recurrent HCC in a patient with cirrhosis and BCS that was treated with several episodes of transarterial chemoembolization followed by surgical tumorectomy, whereas the MOVC was successfully treated with balloon angioplasty followed by endovascular stenting. The patient was followed up for 9.9 years without anticoagulation and experienced no stent thrombosis. After the tumorectomy, the patient was HCC-free for 4.4 years of follow-up.

Adult ; Aneurysm ; Arteries ; Carotid Artery, Internal ; Embolization, Therapeutic ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Angiography ; Parents ; Prospective Studies ; Recurrence ; Retinal Artery ; Retreatment ; Stents ; Stroke, Lacunar ; Thromboembolism

OBJECTIVE: Productivity loss was compared by 3-stage of disease activity and associations between higher disease activity and high productivity loss were identified. METHODS: Data were extracted from Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Patient-reported Outcomes Research, which enrolled 2,000 RA patients (>20-year) on disease-modifying-antirheumatic-drugs (DMARDs) (≥6-month) from December 2012 to June 2013. This included 1,457 RA patients with the disease activity score (DAS-28-ESR) in their medical charts. Productivity loss in time and indirect cost was estimated using The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ). Baseline characteristics and productivity loss outcomes were compared according to DAS-28-ESR groups. RESULTS: 84.4% were females, 54.2% had low DAS-28-ESR ( < 3.2), and 38.2% and 7.6% had moderate (3.2∼5.1) and high DAS-28-ESR (>5.1). Patients with moderate to high DAS-28-ESR had higher lost productivity time (LPT) and monthly costs of LPT than those with low DAS-28-ESR (time in hours: 110.0±58.4 vs. 132.4±57.2 vs. 71.5±52.0, p < 0.0001; monthly costs of LPT in 1,000 Korean won: 1,097±607 vs. 1,302±554 vs. 741±531, p < 0.0001). Multiple regression analyses revealed significant associations with high LPT in high (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=3.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.18∼6.87) and moderate DAS-28-ESR (adjusted OR=1.88, 95% CI: 1.41∼2.52) compared to low DAS-28-ESR. In addition, positive associations with high monthly costs of LPT were observed in high (adjusted OR=3.45, 95% CI: 1.98∼5.99) and moderate DAS-28-ESR (adjusted OR=1.93, 95% CI: 1.43∼2.54) compared to low DAS-28-ESR. CONCLUSION: Timely therapeutic strategies should be taken into consideration given that the RA patients with moderate to high DAS-28-ESR showed strong associations with high productivity loss for effective management of RA.
Arthritis, Rheumatoid* ; Efficiency* ; Female ; Humans ; Odds Ratio ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Work Performance ; World Health Organization