Background: As the role of immunotherapies and personalized medicine grow, cancer patients have faced many choices in treatments and have suffered financial toxicity. These challenges brought the need for the value framework (VF) to guide treatment decision making. Methods: A survey was taken to 102 oncologists about perception for VF. They were asked about priorities among several considerations when they prescribe cancer drugs. Their views on the need for development and potential implications of VF in Korea were assessed, also. Results: The survey shows that 90% of the respondents choose clinical efficacy as the most important value in cancer drugs selection, and the cost of drug was more weighted value in immune checkpoint inhibitors (13.7%). Approximately half (53.9%) answered that they were aware of the existing VFs. Over 90% of respondents agreed with the need for development of a VF for cancer drugs based on Korean healthcare system and further usefulness for decisions about reimbursement issues. Seventy-one percent answered that two representative VFs (American Society Clinical Oncology-VF and European Society for Medical OncologyMagnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale) should be reflected in value measurement of cancer drugs in Korea. Conclusion The Korean oncologists recognized the necessity for the clinical application of VF. Further discussion between the stakeholders should be followed to alleviate the financial burden through the value-based decision making of cancer drugs.

Background: As the role of immunotherapies and personalized medicine grow, cancer patients have faced many choices in treatments and have suffered financial toxicity. These challenges brought the need for the value framework (VF) to guide treatment decision making. Methods: A survey was taken to 102 oncologists about perception for VF. They were asked about priorities among several considerations when they prescribe cancer drugs. Their views on the need for development and potential implications of VF in Korea were assessed, also. Results: The survey shows that 90% of the respondents choose clinical efficacy as the most important value in cancer drugs selection, and the cost of drug was more weighted value in immune checkpoint inhibitors (13.7%). Approximately half (53.9%) answered that they were aware of the existing VFs. Over 90% of respondents agreed with the need for development of a VF for cancer drugs based on Korean healthcare system and further usefulness for decisions about reimbursement issues. Seventy-one percent answered that two representative VFs (American Society Clinical Oncology-VF and European Society for Medical OncologyMagnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale) should be reflected in value measurement of cancer drugs in Korea. Conclusion The Korean oncologists recognized the necessity for the clinical application of VF. Further discussion between the stakeholders should be followed to alleviate the financial burden through the value-based decision making of cancer drugs.

Background/Aims: The World Health Organization (WHO) aims to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) by 2030; therefore, widespread HCV screening is required. The WHO recommends HCV self-testing (HCVST) as a new approach. We aimed to evaluate disease burden reduction using the HCVST screening strategy and identify the most cost-effective approach. Methods: We developed a dynamic open-cohort Markov model to assess the long-term effects and costeffectiveness of HCVST in the Republic of Korea from 2024 to 2030. Strategies for comparison included universal, birth cohort, high-risk group screening, and no screening, focusing on the following: (1) incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) saved; (2) severe liver disease cases; and (3) liverrelated death reduction. Results: Universal HCVST screening is the most effective strategy for achieving the WHO goal by 2030, substantially lowering the incidence of severe liver disease by 71% and preventing liver-related deaths by 69%, thereby averting 267,942 DALYs. Moreover, with an ICER of US$8,078 per DALY and high cost-effectiveness, the sensitivity results prove that cost-effectiveness is robust. Although high-risk group screening offers the lowest cost compared with other strategies, its effectiveness in preventing severe liver disease is minimal, falling short of the current WHO goal. Conclusions Our study confirms that universal HCVST screening is a cost-effective strategy aligned with the WHO goal to eliminate HCV by 2030. Despite its higher costs compared to risk-based screening, the disease burden can be significantly reduced by providing effective HCVST access to individuals who might otherwise not be tested.

Background/Aims: The World Health Organization (WHO) aims to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) by 2030; therefore, widespread HCV screening is required. The WHO recommends HCV self-testing (HCVST) as a new approach. We aimed to evaluate disease burden reduction using the HCVST screening strategy and identify the most cost-effective approach. Methods: We developed a dynamic open-cohort Markov model to assess the long-term effects and costeffectiveness of HCVST in the Republic of Korea from 2024 to 2030. Strategies for comparison included universal, birth cohort, high-risk group screening, and no screening, focusing on the following: (1) incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) saved; (2) severe liver disease cases; and (3) liverrelated death reduction. Results: Universal HCVST screening is the most effective strategy for achieving the WHO goal by 2030, substantially lowering the incidence of severe liver disease by 71% and preventing liver-related deaths by 69%, thereby averting 267,942 DALYs. Moreover, with an ICER of US$8,078 per DALY and high cost-effectiveness, the sensitivity results prove that cost-effectiveness is robust. Although high-risk group screening offers the lowest cost compared with other strategies, its effectiveness in preventing severe liver disease is minimal, falling short of the current WHO goal. Conclusions Our study confirms that universal HCVST screening is a cost-effective strategy aligned with the WHO goal to eliminate HCV by 2030. Despite its higher costs compared to risk-based screening, the disease burden can be significantly reduced by providing effective HCVST access to individuals who might otherwise not be tested.

Background/Aims: The World Health Organization (WHO) aims to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) by 2030; therefore, widespread HCV screening is required. The WHO recommends HCV self-testing (HCVST) as a new approach. We aimed to evaluate disease burden reduction using the HCVST screening strategy and identify the most cost-effective approach. Methods: We developed a dynamic open-cohort Markov model to assess the long-term effects and costeffectiveness of HCVST in the Republic of Korea from 2024 to 2030. Strategies for comparison included universal, birth cohort, high-risk group screening, and no screening, focusing on the following: (1) incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) saved; (2) severe liver disease cases; and (3) liverrelated death reduction. Results: Universal HCVST screening is the most effective strategy for achieving the WHO goal by 2030, substantially lowering the incidence of severe liver disease by 71% and preventing liver-related deaths by 69%, thereby averting 267,942 DALYs. Moreover, with an ICER of US$8,078 per DALY and high cost-effectiveness, the sensitivity results prove that cost-effectiveness is robust. Although high-risk group screening offers the lowest cost compared with other strategies, its effectiveness in preventing severe liver disease is minimal, falling short of the current WHO goal. Conclusions Our study confirms that universal HCVST screening is a cost-effective strategy aligned with the WHO goal to eliminate HCV by 2030. Despite its higher costs compared to risk-based screening, the disease burden can be significantly reduced by providing effective HCVST access to individuals who might otherwise not be tested.

Obesity is one of the most serious health problems in developed countries. It negatively affects diverse aspects of human wellbeing. Of these, a relationship between obesity and depression is widely recognized but biomarkers for assessment of obesityassociated mood changes in animal obesity models are rarely known. Here we explored the link between obesity and the plasma levels of monoamine neurotransmitters involved in mood control using a sensitive UPLC/MSMS technique in high fat diet (HFD)-induced obesity model in male C57BL/6 mice to explore the potential utility of plasma tests for obesity-associated mood change. HFD (60% of total calories, 8 weeks) induced significantly higher weight gains in body (+37.8%) and fat tissue (+306%) in male C57BL/6 mice. Bioanalysis of serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine in plasma at 8 weeks of HFD revealed that serotonin decreased significantly in the obese mice when compared to normal diet-fed mice (2.7 +/- 0.6 vs 4.3 +/- 2.0 ng/ml, N=8). Notably, a negative correlation was found between the levels of serotonin and body weight gains. Furthermore, principal component analysis (PCA) with the individual levels of neurotransmitters revealed that plasma levels of dopamine and serotonin could apparently differentiate the obese mice from lean ones. Our study demonstrated that blood plasma levels of neurotransmitters can be employed to evaluate the mood changes associated with obesity and more importantly, provided an important clue for understanding of the relationship between obesity and mood disorders.
Animals ; Biomarkers ; Body Weight ; Depression ; Developed Countries ; Diet, High-Fat ; Dopamine ; Humans ; Male ; Mice* ; Mice, Obese ; Mood Disorders ; Neurotransmitter Agents* ; Norepinephrine ; Obesity* ; Plasma* ; Principal Component Analysis ; Serotonin ; Weight Gain

Novel clinical trial designs are conducted in the precision medicine era. This study aimed to evaluate biomarker-driven, adaptive phase II trials in precision oncology, focusing on infrastructure, efficacy, and safety. We systematically reviewed and analyzed the target studies. EMBASE and PubMed searches from 2015 to 2023 generated 29 eligible trials. Data extraction included infrastructure, biomarker screening methodologies, efficacy, and safety profiles. Government agencies, cancer hospitals, and academic societies with accumulated experiences led investigator-initiated precision oncology clinical trials (IIPOCTs), which later guided sponsor-initiated precision oncology clinical trials (SIPOCTs). Most SIPOCTs were international studies with basket design. IIPOCTs primarily used the central laboratory for biomarker screening, but SIPOCTs used both central and local laboratories. Most of the studies adapted next-generation sequencing and/or immunohistochemistry for biomarker screening. Fifteen studies included an independent central review committee for outcome investigation. Efficacy assessments predominantly featured objective response rate as the primary endpoint, with varying results. Nine eligible studies contributed to the United States Food and Drug Administration’s marketing authorization. Safety monitoring was rigorous, but reporting formats lacked uniformity. Health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes were described in some protocols but rarely reported. Our results reveal that precision oncology trials with adaptive design rapidly and efficiently evaluate anticancer drugs’ efficacy and safety, particularly in specified biomarker-driven cohorts. The evolution from IIPOCT to SIPOCT has facilitated fast regulatory approval, providing valuable insights into the precision oncology landscape.