Recent advancements in artificial intelligence have led to increased interest in predictive modeling across various domains, including medicine. Although numerous metrics have been established for binary classification, the growing adoption of multi-class systems necessitates robust evaluation measures. However, comprehensive simulation studies comparing the performance of existing multi-class metrics under diverse data conditions remain limited. In this study, we first provide a concise overview of commonly used accuracy metrics for multi-class classification. Then, we report a simulation study that systematically evaluates several diagnostic accuracy measures under a wide range of scenarios, including three- and five-class settings, balanced and imbalanced sample sizes, and different distributional assumptions for predictors. We assessed each metric’s performance in terms of bias and 95% confidence interval coverage. Under balanced conditions, most metrics demonstrated stable and unbiased performance, closely approximating the true values. However, under imbalanced conditions, greater bias was observed, with the M-index and polytomous discrimination index exhibiting comparatively more stable performance across various scenarios. The micro-averaged receiver operating characteristic curve area consistently showed higher bias under class imbalance. Finally, we applied these metrics to a glioma tumor grading task using external datasets. This study provides a systematic comparison of commonly used metrics and offers practical guidance for selecting appropriate measures in multi-class classification tasks.

Objective: Although most gallbladder polyps are benign, some neoplastic polyps may be malignant or may serve as precursors to malignancy. Distinguishing neoplastic and non-neoplastic polyps using imaging examinations remains a major challenge.This meta-analysis aimed to identify the ultrasound (US) features that are significantly associated with neoplastic polyps. Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and KoreaMed databases were searched for articles published up to August 31, 2025. Bivariate random-effects models were used to calculate the meta-analytic pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DORs), sensitivities, and specificities, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for each US imaging feature in the diagnosis of neoplastic polyps. Results: Thirty studies evaluating 8,953 patients, including 1,216 (13.6%) patients with neoplastic polyps, were included.Among the nine evaluated US imaging features, namely, size ≥10 mm, sessile morphology, single polyp, coexisting gallstones, hypoechogenicity, heterogeneous echogenicity, gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT), absence of hyperechoic spot, and vascularity, eight were significantly associated with neoplastic polyps: size ≥10 mm (DOR: 6.23 [95% CI: 1.86– 20.90]), sessile morphology (DOR: 3.54 [1.93–5.97]), single polyp (DOR: 2.21 [1.76–2.74]), coexisting gallstones (DOR:1.86 [1.29–2.60]), hypoechogenicity (DOR: 3.55 [1.47–7.30]), GBWT (DOR: 9.38 [1.47–32.20]), absence of hyperechoic spots (DOR: 4.23 [2.46–6.83]), and vascularity (DOR: 9.72 [5.81–15.30]). Of these, size ≥10 mm demonstrated the highest pooled sensitivity (0.79 [95% CI: 0.68–0.87]), whereas hypoechogenicity showed the highest pooled specificity (0.93 [95% CI: 0.82–0.98]). Conclusion Eight US imaging features (size ≥10 mm, sessile morphology, single polyp, coexisting gallstones, hypoechogenicity, GBWT, absence of hyperechoic spots, and vascularity) were significantly associated with the presence of neoplastic polyps.These features may facilitate the management of gallbladder polyps.

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the “probable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)” category in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) v2022 guidelines. Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients at risk of HCC who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI between January 2015 and June 2018; a subgroup of these patients also underwent liver CT. Eligible patients had at least one non-cystic lesion (≥10 mm) with a reference standard. Four radiologists interpreted the images independently and the results were pooled. The performance of “definite HCC” and “probable HCC” together and “probable HCC” alone were compared between v2018 and v2022. Results: A total of 2,237 patients (1,666 men; mean age, 59 ± 11 years) with 2,445 lesions were included. In v2022, 1.5% (143/9,780) of the lesions were additionally categorized as “probable HCC” by four reviewers on MRI; among these, 104 lesions were not HCCs. Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) or FNH-like nodules constituted 90.4% (94/104) of the false positives. When “definite HCC” and “probable HCC” were combined, v2022 showed higher sensitivity (83.7% [5,670/6,776] vs. 83.1% [5,631/6,776]) but lower specificity (77.1% [2,316/3,004] vs. 80.6% [2,420/3,004]) than v2018 (P < 0.001). For “probable HCC” alone, v2022 showed a lower positive predictive value (PPV) than v2018 (64.1% [373/582] vs. 76.1% [334/439], P < 0.001). In v2022, lesions with non-rim arterial-phase hyperenhancement (APHE) showed a lower PPV than those without APHE (42.3% [91/215] vs. 76.8% [282/367], P < 0.001). In the CT subgroup (n = 1,590), 1.6% (99/6,360) of the lesions were reassessed as “probable HCC,” and its PPV was 83.8% (83/99) in v2022 whereas no lesions were classified as “probable HCC” under v2018. Conclusion The revised “probable HCC” category in the KLCA-NCC v2022 aligns with updates in the diagnostic flow, demonstrating acceptable performance on MRI and CT. Notably, FNH or FNH-like nodules can be misclassified as “probable HCC” when MRI is used.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncologic outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE) using a clustered electrode in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Materials and Methods: In this single-center prospective cohort study, 13 patients with LAPC (median age, 60 years; range, 48–78 years) underwent clustered electrode IRE between September 2022 and September 2024. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Endpoints included technical success, procedure-related complications, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Tumors were located in the pancreatic head in four patients (30.8%) and in the body/tail in nine (69.2%). The median tumor size was 2.4 cm (1.5–4.0 cm), and vascular invasion was present in all patients. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Intraoperative IRE was performed in 11 (84.6%) patients, and 2 (15.4%) patients underwent percutaneous IRE. Gastrointestinal bleeding events as major complications occurred in two patients (15.4%) and, both were successfully controlled by embolization. No 60-day mortality was observed. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months (range, 9.9–33.4 months) after IRE, median OS and PFS from IRE were 20.1 and 14.5 months, respectively. Conclusion IRE using clustered electrodes for LAPC appears to be a feasible therapeutic approach, offering reliable technical success and acceptable safety. Survival outcomes are encouraging; however, larger, controlled studies are required.

The global increase in obesity highlights the need for accurate tools to assess body composition and monitor treatment efficacy.Traditional metrics, including body mass index and waist circumference, offer limited precision for fat quantification. Imagingbased techniques capable of visualizing internal structures are increasingly being recognized for their ability to provide comprehensive fat assessment. This review outlines the principles, strengths, and limitations of key modalities, including dualenergy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), CT, MRI, and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). DXA is cost-effective and accessible for population-level screening, whereas CT and MRI offer higher precision, particularly for visceral fat assessment. BIA is a practical, low-cost alternative, but it is limited by variability and lack of standardization. Regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, are increasingly supporting imaging-based endpoints in clinical trials of anti-obesity drugs because these methods capture fat mass reduction beyond total weight loss. Recent phase III trials of semaglutide and tirzepatide have underscored the utility of DXA and CT in quantifying fat loss and preserving lean mass. Selecting appropriate imaging modalities based on technical capabilities and regulatory considerations can improve the evaluation of obesity treatments and strengthen the design of anti-obesity drug trials.

Objective: Evidence remains limited regarding whether Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) or modified RECIST (mRECIST) more reliably assesses treatment response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev). This study aimed to evaluate response patterns based on RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST, analyze inter-reader agreement, and assess their prognostic value for overall survival (OS) in patients with HCC receiving first-line Atezo/Bev. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included patients with HCC treated with first-line Atezo/Bev between June 2020 and December 2022 at a tertiary center. Patients with at least one hypervascular hepatic target lesion were eligible. Two radiologists independently assessed treatment responses using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Time-dependent Cox regression analysis was performed, with radiologic response and progression treated as time-varying covariates. Prognostic discrimination was evaluated using Harrell’s concordance index (C-index). Results: A total of 207 patients were included (171 men; median age, 63 years; median follow-up, 10.7 months [range, 0.8– 46.4 months]; median OS, 10.7 months [95% confidence interval, 9.2–12.8 months]). mRECIST identified more responders than RECIST 1.1 (54.6% vs. 16.9%). RECIST 1.1 demonstrated excellent inter-reader agreement, whereas mRECIST showed substantial agreement (weighted kappa, 0.89 vs. 0.79). A significantly higher rate of dissociated responses was observed with mRECIST than with RECIST 1.1 (14.0% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.001). Both RECIST 1.1- and mRECIST-based responses and progression were independently associated with OS. Models incorporating RECIST 1.1 demonstrated slightly higher C-index values than those incorporating mRECIST (RECIST 1.1: 0.68 for response and 0.75 for progression; mRECIST: 0.65 and 0.70, respectively). Conclusion RECIST 1.1 is more reproducible and prognostically valuable for guiding treatment decisions in patients with HCC receiving first-line Atezo/Bev. However, this does not invalidate the use of mRECIST as a biological tumor response marker.

Bowel preparation is a key determinant of colonoscopy quality; however, inadequate cleansing remains common among patients with overlapping clinical and logistical barriers. In routine practice, preparation failure may prolong procedures, reduce diagnostic confidence, and necessitate early repeat colonoscopy. We review major society guidelines and selected studies addressing bowel preparation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), older adults, chronic constipation, and hospitalized patients. Across these settings, the most consistently supported measures include split-dose administration, completion of the final dose close to the time of colonoscopy in accordance with local fasting and sedation policies, and structured patient instructions reinforced through follow-up communication. A standardized assessment of preparation quality is recommended to support quality improvement and appropriate follow-up. Risk stratification can help identify patients who may benefit from intensified preparation pathways, including those with prior inadequate preparation, severe constipation, frailty, or inpatient status. Safety considerations are particularly important in CKD, in which oral sodium phosphate should be avoided and magnesium-containing agents used cautiously; polyethylene glycol-based solutions are generally preferred. In IBD, regimen selection should also consider endoscopic interpretability because sodium phosphate preparations have been associated with preparation-related mucosal abnormalities that may confound the assessment of subtle inflammatory findings. Among hospitalized patients, system-level barriers often predominate, and protocolized pathways may improve workflow and patient comfort while maintaining cleansing effectiveness. We propose a practical, risk-stratified approach to regimen selection, timing, rescue strategies, and safety monitoring that can be implemented in high-volume clinical practice.

Obesity is a chronic, progressive neuroendocrine disease that warrants a shift toward an “onco-bariatric” treatment paradigm. This study introduces the tri-phasic metabolic obesity (TPMO) framework, which integrates glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS). Recent clinical and economic evidence—including findings from the Indiana multicenter study and the Highmark Health analysis—was reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of the TPMO model in improving surgical and metabolic outcomes. The TPMO framework streamlines the patient journey through three synergistic phases. In the neoadjuvant phase, a 4–8-week course of GLP-1 RAs reduces liver volume and visceral fat, thereby improving surgical access, provided that treatment is discontinued 1 week before surgery to mitigate aspiration risk. During the core surgery phase, MBS provides a definitive metabolic reset and remains the most cost-effective treatment, yielding an average savings of $11,689 per patient over 2 years compared with medication alone. In the adjuvant phase, pharmacotherapy—used by 17.2% of post-bariatric patients—counteracts metabolic adaptation and supports sustained weight loss, while a high-protein intake (≥1.2 g/kg/day) is essential for preserving lean body mass. The TPMO framework represents a precision-based, synergistic standard of care designed to promote durable, cost-effective long-term metabolic health within the onco-bariatric paradigm.