Cardiovascular disease is an important risk factor for mortality among kidney transplant recipients. In this study, we aimed to investigate the association between cardiovascular risk score at kidney transplantation and long-term outcomes of patients. Methods: In this prospective, observational cohort study, we enrolled kidney transplant recipients who participated in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry and underwent transplantation between April 2014 and December 2019. The cardiovascular risk status of kidney transplant recipients was assessed using the Framingham risk score. All-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, allograft failure, estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs), and composite outcomes were evaluated after kidney transplantation. Results: Of the 4,682 kidney transplant recipients, 96 died during 30.7 ± 19.1 months of follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis results showed that high Framingham risk scores were associated with all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and composite outcomes. According to the multivariable Cox analysis, high Framingham risk scores were associated with an increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 3.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30–7.91), major adverse cardiovascular events (HR, 8.43; 95% CI, 2.41–29.52), and composite outcomes (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.19–3.46). The eGFRs after transplantation were significantly higher among patients in the low Framingham risk score group (p < 0.001). However, Framingham risk scores were not associated with graft loss or rapid decline in eGFRs. Conclusion: The Framingham risk score is a useful indicator of cardiovascular events, mortality, and kidney function after kidney transplantation.

Background: Posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) complicates kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to predict PTDM risk in KTRs using machine learning and deep learning models. Methods: Data were obtained from the Korea Organ Transplantation Registry, a nationwide cohort study of KTRs. Four machine learning algorithms, including eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), CatBoost, light gradient boosting machine and logistic regression, and deep learning were implemented on 41 pretransplant and 31 posttransplant variables to predict PTDM. Model performance was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score. Results: Among 3,213 KTRs, 497 patients (15.5%) developed PTDM within 1 year. The PTDM group had higher age, body mass index (BMI), triglyceride level, and prevalence of hypertension and cardiovascular disease, and lower total cholesterol level at baseline than the No-PTDM group. The XGBoost model showed the highest AUC (0.738) and F1 score (0.42), and modest accuracy (0.86), while the CatBoost model exhibited the highest accuracy (0.87) and precision (0.79). Feature importance in XGBoost was highest for recipient age, followed by baseline BMI, triglyceride level at posttransplant 6 months, baseline glycated hemoglobin and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, white blood cell (WBC) count and serum uric acid level at 6 months, baseline WBC count, and tacrolimus trough level at discharge. Conclusion The XGBoost model demonstrated the best performance for predicting PTDM within 1 year, offering an accurate tool for early identification and personalized care of high-risk KTRs for PTDM.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Purpose: Optimal treatment for stage IIIA/N2 non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adjuvant pembrolizumab for stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC completely resected after neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). Materials and Methods: In this open-label, single-center, single-arm phase 2 trial, patients with stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC received adjuvant pembrolizumab for up to 2 years after complete resection following neoadjuvant CCRT. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. As an exploratory biomarker analysis, we evaluated the proliferative response of blood CD39+PD-1+CD8+ T cells using fold changes in the percentage of proliferating Ki-67+ cells from days 1 to 7 of cycle 1 (Ki-67D7/D1). Results: Between October 2017 and October 2018, 37 patients were enrolled. Twelve (32%) and three (8%) patients harbored EGFR and ALK alterations, respectively. Of 34 patients with programmed cell death ligand 1 assessment, 21 (62%), nine (26%), and four (12%) had a tumor proportion score of < 1%, 1%-50%, and ≥ 50%, respectively. The median follow-up was 71 months. The median DFS was 22.4 months in the overall population, with a 5-year DFS rate of 29%. The OS rate was 86% at 2 years and 76% at 5 years. Patients with tumor recurrence within 6 months had a significantly lower Ki-67D7/D1 among CD39+PD-1+CD8+ T cells than those without (p=0.036). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusion Adjuvant pembrolizumab may offer durable disease control in a subset of stage IIIA/N2 NSCLC patients after neoadjuvant CCRT and surgery.

Local ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma, a non-surgical option that directly targets and destroys tumor cells, has advanced significantly since the 1990s. Therapies with different energy sources, such as radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation, employ different mechanisms to induce tumor necrosis. The precision, safety, and effectiveness of these therapies have increased with advances in guiding technologies and device improvements.Consequently, local ablation has become the first-line treatment for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. The lack of organized evidence and expert opinions regarding patient selection, preprocedure preparation, procedural methods, swift post-treatment evaluation, and follow-up has resulted in clinicians following varied practices. Therefore, an expert consensus-based practical recommendation for local ablation was developed by a group of experts in radiology and hepatology from the Research Committee of the Korean Liver Cancer Association in collaboration with the Korean Society of Image-Guided Tumor Ablation to provide useful information and guidance for performing local ablation and for the pre- and post-treatment management of patients.

Local ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a non-surgical option that directly targets and destroys tumor cells, has advanced significantly since the 1990s. Therapies with different energy sources, such as radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation, employ different mechanisms to induce tumor necrosis. The precision, safety, and effectiveness of these therapies have increased with advances in guiding technologies and device improvements. Consequently, local ablation has become the firstline treatment for early-stage HCC. The lack of organized evidence and expert opinions regarding patient selection, pre-procedure preparation, procedural methods, swift post-treatment evaluation, and follow-up has resulted in clinicians following varied practices. Therefore, an expert consensus-based practical recommendation for local ablation was developed by a group of experts in radiology and hepatology from the Research Committee of the Korean Liver Cancer Association in collaboration with the Korean Society of Image-guided Tumor Ablation to provide useful information and guidance for performing local ablation and for the pre- and posttreatment management of patients.

Local ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a non-surgical option that directly targets and destroys tumor cells, has advanced significantly since the 1990s. Therapies with different energy sources, such as radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation, employ different mechanisms to induce tumor necrosis. The precision, safety, and effectiveness of these therapies have increased with advances in guiding technologies and device improvements. Consequently, local ablation has become the first-line treatment for early-stage HCC. The lack of organized evidence and expert opinions regarding patient selection, pre-procedure preparation, procedural methods, swift post-treatment evaluation, and follow-up has resulted in clinicians following varied practices. Therefore, an expert consensus-based practical recommendation for local ablation was developed by a group of experts in radiology and hepatology from the Research Committee of the Korean Liver Cancer Association in collaboration with the Korean Society of Image-guided Tumor Ablation to provide useful information and guidance for performing local ablation and for the pre- and post-treatment management of patients.

Purpose: The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy following curative-intent surgery in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients who had received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX is unclear. This study aimed to assess the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in this patient population. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 218 patients with localized non-metastatic PDAC who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and underwent curative-intent surgery (R0 or R1) between January 2017 and December 2020. The association of adjuvant chemotherapy with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated in overall patients and in the propensity score matched (PSM) cohort. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to the pathology-proven lymph node status. Results: Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 149 patients (68.3%). In the overall cohort, the adjuvant chemotherapy group had significantly improved DFS and OS compared to the observation group (DFS: median, 13.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.0 to 19.1] vs. 8.2 months [95% CI, 6.5 to 12.0]; p < 0.001; and OS: median, 38.0 months [95% CI, 32.2 to not assessable] vs. 25.7 months [95% CI, 18.3 to not assessable]; p=0.005). In the PSM cohort of 57 matched pairs of patients, DFS and OS were better in the adjuvant chemotherapy group than in the observation group (p < 0.001 and p=0.038, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy was a significant favorable prognostic factor (vs. observation; DFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.71; p < 0.001]; OS: HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.71; p < 0.001]). Conclusion Among PDAC patients who underwent surgery following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, adjuvant chemotherapy may be associated with improved survival. Randomized studies should be conducted to validate this finding.

Growing evidence suggests that environmental air pollution adversely affects kidney health. To date, the association between carbon monoxide (CO) and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has not been examined. Methods: Among 134,478 dialysis patients in the Korean ESRD cohort between 2001 and 2014, 8,130 deceased hemodialysis patients were enrolled, and data were analyzed using bidirectional, unidirectional, and time-stratified case-crossover design. We examined the association between short-term CO concentration and mortality in patients with ESRD. We used a two-pollutant model, adjusted for temperature as a climate factor and for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), and particulate matter less than 10 μm in diameter as air pollution variables other than CO. Results: Characteristics of the study population included age (66.2 ± 12.1 years), sex (male, 59.1%; female, 40.9%), and comorbidities (diabetes, 55.6%; hypertension, 14.4%). Concentration of CO was significantly associated with all-cause mortality in the three case-crossover designs using the two-pollutant model adjusted for SO2. Patients with diabetes or age older than 75 years had a higher risk of mortality than patients without diabetes or those younger than 75 years. Conclusion: Findings presented here suggest that higher CO concentration is correlated with increased all-cause mortality in hemodialysis patients, especially in older high-risk patients.

Long-term outcomes of live kidney donors remain controversial, although this information is crucial for selecting potential donors. Thus, this study compared the long-term risk of all-cause mortality between live kidney donors and healthy control. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study including donors from seven tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Persons who underwent voluntary health screening were included as controls. We created a matched control group considering age, sex, era, body mass index, baseline hypertension, diabetes, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and dipstick albuminuria. The study outcome was progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and all-cause mortality as identified in the linked claims database. Results: We screened 1,878 kidney donors and 78,115 health screening examinees from 2003 to 2016. After matching, 1,701 persons remained in each group. The median age of the matched study subjects was 44 years, and 46.6% were male. Among the study subjects, 2.7% and 16.6% had underlying diabetes and hypertension, respectively. There were no ESKD events in the matched donor and control groups. There were 24 (1.4%) and 12 mortality cases (0.7%) in the matched donor and control groups, respectively. In the age-sex adjusted model, the risk for all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the donor group than in the control group. However, the significance was not retained after socioeconomic status was included as a covariate (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.87–3.80). Conclusion: All-cause mortality was similar in live kidney donors and matched non-donor healthy controls with similar health status and socioeconomic status in the Korean population.