Background/Aims: The International Anorectal Physiology Working Group (IAPWG) has proposed a standardized protocol and the London classification to enhance the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry (ARM). However, real-world adoption in Asian countries has not been systematically assessed. This study aims to evaluate current ARM practices and adherence to the IAPWG protocol across Asian centers. Methods: A cross-sectional, 50-item web-based survey was distributed to gastroenterologists and motility specialists practicing in Asian countries. Results: Thirty-one centers from 8 countries responded (20 in Korea, 3 in Japan, 2 in Taiwan, 1 in China, and 7 in other countries). High-resolution ARM was used in 80.6% of centers, primarily with solid-state catheters. While all centers performed rest and short squeeze maneuvers, only 58.1% conducted all maneuvers recommended by the IAPWG protocol.Considerable variation was observed in test methodology and interpretation, including definitions of resting pressure, squeeze duration, push maneuver repetition, and rectal balloon volume for rectoanal inhibitory reflex. For balloon expulsion and rectal sensory testing, centers differed in patient positioning, balloon type, inflation methods, and threshold definitions. Only 38.7% of centers reported having institutional normative values for test interpretation, and 64.5% applied the London classification. Conclusions Across Asian centers, ARM practice shows marked regional variation and incomplete implementation of the IAPWG standardized protocol and London classification, highlighting persistent gaps in standardization. Strengthening procedural guidance, regionally appropriate normative data, and interpretation criteria through coordinated education and international collaboration is needed to support more consistent and clinically meaningful use of ARM in routine practice.

Purpose: This 6-year post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted in South Korea to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of eribulin in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Materials and Methods: During the study period (17 August 2012 to 16 August 2018), case-report files (CRFs) of patients receiving eribulin were collected. The main study endpoint was to assess the safety of eribulin. Evaluation of the effectiveness of eribulin was an exploratory endpoint. Patients were followed for 1 year after eribulin initiation. Results: CRFs were collected from 64 investigators at 64 sites for 1,079 patients. The safety analysis set (SAS) included 1,001 eribulin recipients; effectiveness was assessed in 244 patients. In the SAS, patients were predominantly female (99.6%), with a median age of 53.0 years, and diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer (92.0%). Eribulin was administered as a median 4th line chemotherapy. A total of 2,124 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 661 patients (66.0%). Neutropenia was the most common TEAE (32.5% of patients), occurring at a median of 9-11 days from initial eribulin administration. Overall response and disease control rates were 31.7% and 95.6%, respectively, and the median duration of eribulin use (time to treatment failure) was 3.0 months. Conclusion This large real-world PMS analysis in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer demonstrated the effectiveness of eribulin and found no new safety concerns relative to safety information from prior clinical and real-world studies, and approvals in South Korea and other countries.

Background/Aims: To determine the effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus reduced-intensity therapy in adult patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph-positive ALL), this retrospective study compared treatment outcomes and induction mortality according to backbone regimen intensity. Methods: The data of 132 patients diagnosed with Ph-positive ALL were retrospectively collected from five centers. Patients received imatinib plus intensive chemotherapy (modified VPD, KALLA1407, or hyper-CVAD) or reduced-intensity chemotherapy (EWALL) for curative purposes. This study analyzed 117 patients, of which 35,22,46, and 14 received modified VPD, KALLA1407, hyper-CVAD, and EWALL, respectively. All patients used imatinib as a TKI. Results: The median age of the patients who received reduced-intensity chemotherapy was 64.4 years, while that of the patients with intensive regimens was 47.5 years. There was no induction death in the reduced-intensity group, while nine patients died in the intensive therapy group. Major molecular response achievement tended to be higher in the intensive chemotherapy group than in the reduced-intensity group. More patients in the intensive chemotherapy group received allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). There was no statistically significant difference in long-term survival between the two groups in terms of relapse-free survival and overall survival rates. Conclusions When imatinib plus reduced-intensity therapy was used as a frontline treatment, there was no inferiority in obtaining complete remission compared to imatinib plus intensive chemotherapy or significant difference in long-term survival. Since imatinib plus reduced-intensity therapy has limitations in obtaining a deep molecular response, proceeding to allo-SCT should be considered.

Purpose: To investigate the role of combined periprostatic nerve block (PNB) and intrarectal local anesthesia with heated lidocaine gel (ILAHL) in reducing pain during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy, compared with PNB alone. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective randomized trial with 140 participants who underwent systematic TRUS-guid ed, 12-core prostate biopsy from July 2021 to June 2022. These participants were divided into two groups. Before prostate biopsy, group 1 (n=70) received PNB and group 2 (n=70) received PNB combined intrarectal local anesthesia with 20 mL of heated (40ºC) 2% lidocaine gel. The primary outcome was pain score on a 0–10 visual analogue scale (VAS) at four time points (VAS A: during local anesthesia procedure, VAS B: during probe insertion, VAS C: during biopsy procedure, VAS D: 30 minutes after biopsy). The secondary outcome included adverse events during and after the procedure. Results: Mean pain scores were significantly lower in group 2 than in group 1 at VAS A (2.53 vs. 1.60, p=0.001) and VAS B (2.47 vs.1.49, p<0.001). The mean VAS C pain score in group 2 was significantly less than in group 1 (3.07 vs. 2.20, p=0.001), while there was no significant difference in the mean VAS D pain score between two groups (1.06 vs. 0.89, p=0.318). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of complications in both groups. Conclusions The combination of PNB and ILAHL provides more effective pain control than PNB alone without increase of complication rates in patients undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy.

Background/Aims: To determine the effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) plus reduced-intensity therapy in adult patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph-positive ALL), this retrospective study compared treatment outcomes and induction mortality according to backbone regimen intensity. Methods: The data of 132 patients diagnosed with Ph-positive ALL were retrospectively collected from five centers. Patients received imatinib plus intensive chemotherapy (modified VPD, KALLA1407, or hyper-CVAD) or reduced-intensity chemotherapy (EWALL) for curative purposes. This study analyzed 117 patients, of which 35,22,46, and 14 received modified VPD, KALLA1407, hyper-CVAD, and EWALL, respectively. All patients used imatinib as a TKI. Results: The median age of the patients who received reduced-intensity chemotherapy was 64.4 years, while that of the patients with intensive regimens was 47.5 years. There was no induction death in the reduced-intensity group, while nine patients died in the intensive therapy group. Major molecular response achievement tended to be higher in the intensive chemotherapy group than in the reduced-intensity group. More patients in the intensive chemotherapy group received allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). There was no statistically significant difference in long-term survival between the two groups in terms of relapse-free survival and overall survival rates. Conclusions When imatinib plus reduced-intensity therapy was used as a frontline treatment, there was no inferiority in obtaining complete remission compared to imatinib plus intensive chemotherapy or significant difference in long-term survival. Since imatinib plus reduced-intensity therapy has limitations in obtaining a deep molecular response, proceeding to allo-SCT should be considered.