Purpose: The current study provides national cancer statistics and their secular trends in Korea, including incidence, mortality, survival, and prevalence in 2023, with international comparisons. Materials and Methods: Cancer incidence, survival, and prevalence rates were calculated using the Korea National Cancer Incidence Database (1999-2023), with survival follow-up until December 31, 2024. Mortality data were obtained from the Ministry of Data and Statistics, while international comparisons were based on GLOBOCAN data. Results: In 2023, 288,613 newly diagnosed cancer cases (age-standardized rate [ASR], 288.6 per 100,000) and 85,271 deaths from cancer (ASR, 64.3 per 100,000) were reported. Among the incident cases, 145,452 (50.4%) were aged 65 years or older. Prostate cancer became the most common cancer among men for the first time. The proportion of localized-stage cancers increased from 45.6% in 2005 to 51.8% in 2023. Korea had the lowest cancer mortality among countries with similar incidence rates and the lowest mortality-to-incidence ratios for stomach, colorectal, and breast cancer. The 5-year relative survival rate (2019-2023) was 73.7% overall and 92.7% for localized-stage cancers. Over 2.73 million prevalent cases were identified in 2023, representing 5.3% of the Korean population. Conclusion These findings indicate that Korea’s cancer control efforts have contributed to early detection and improved survival outcomes. As Korea enters a super-aged society in 2025, cancer burden will continue to increase, requiring sustained and adaptive cancer control strategies.

Purpose: This study aimed to report the real-world outcomes of intravesical gemcitabine for bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive, high-risk, non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (HR-NMIBC) in Korean patients who were unable or unwilling to undergo radical cystectomy (RC). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 131 patients (median age, 69 years; 88.5% men) treated with intravesical gemcitabine for BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC at nine centers between May 2019 and April 2022. The primary endpoint was 1-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary endpoints included factors influencing RFS, progression-free survival (PFS), cystectomy- free survival, cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and risk factors for recurrence were assessed using Cox regression models. Results: Patients were followed up for a median duration of 25 months, with carcinoma in situ (CIS) in 41.9% of the patients. The 1-year and 2-year RFS rates were 68% and 42%, while the 1-year and 2-year PFS rates were 87% and 77%, respectively. No significant factors influencing RFS were identified. Seventeen patients underwent RC during a median follow-up of 16 months, with the condition in three patients progressing to muscle-invasive disease on final pathological analysis. The 2-year CSS and OS rates were 98% and 97%, respectively. Intravesical gemcitabine was well-tolerated, with only seven patients (5.3%) unable to complete the full induction course. Conclusion Our research highlights the potential of intravesical gemcitabine as a viable bladder-sparing treatment option for BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC, providing real-world evidence on its safety, efficacy, and tolerability.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Purpose: In Korea, the Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) was implemented on February 4, 2018. We aimed to investigate relevant factors and clinical changes associated with LST decisions after law enforcement. Materials and Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who completed LST documents using legal forms at Asan Medical Center from February 5, 2018, to June 30, 2020. Results: 5,896 patients completed LST documents, of which 2,704 (45.8%) signed the documents in person, while family members of 3,192 (54%) wrote the documents on behalf of the patients. Comparing first year and following year of implementation of the act, the self-documentation rate increased (43.9% to 47.2%, p=0.014). Moreover, the number of LST decisions made during or after intensive care unit admission decreased (37.8% vs. 35.2%, p=0.045), and the completion rate of LST documents during chemotherapy increased (6.6% vs. 8.9%, p=0.001). In multivariate analysis, age < 65 (odds ratio [OR], 1.724; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.538 to 1.933; p < 0.001), unmarried status (OR, 1.309; 95% CI, 1.097 to 1.561; p=0.003), palliative care consultation (OR, 1.538; 95% CI, 1.340 to 1.765; p < 0.001), malignancy (OR, 1.864; 95% CI, 1.628 to 2.133; p < 0.001), and changes in timing on the first year versus following year (OR, 1.124; 95% CI, 1.003 to 1.260; p=0.045) were related to a higher self-documentation rate. Conclusion Age < 65 years, unmarried status, malignancy, and referral to a palliative care team were associated with patients making LST decisions themselves. Furthermore, the subject and timing of LST decisions have changed with the LST act.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Purpose: In Korea, the Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) was implemented on February 4, 2018. We aimed to investigate relevant factors and clinical changes associated with LST decisions after law enforcement. Materials and Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who completed LST documents using legal forms at Asan Medical Center from February 5, 2018, to June 30, 2020. Results: 5,896 patients completed LST documents, of which 2,704 (45.8%) signed the documents in person, while family members of 3,192 (54%) wrote the documents on behalf of the patients. Comparing first year and following year of implementation of the act, the self-documentation rate increased (43.9% to 47.2%, p=0.014). Moreover, the number of LST decisions made during or after intensive care unit admission decreased (37.8% vs. 35.2%, p=0.045), and the completion rate of LST documents during chemotherapy increased (6.6% vs. 8.9%, p=0.001). In multivariate analysis, age < 65 (odds ratio [OR], 1.724; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.538 to 1.933; p < 0.001), unmarried status (OR, 1.309; 95% CI, 1.097 to 1.561; p=0.003), palliative care consultation (OR, 1.538; 95% CI, 1.340 to 1.765; p < 0.001), malignancy (OR, 1.864; 95% CI, 1.628 to 2.133; p < 0.001), and changes in timing on the first year versus following year (OR, 1.124; 95% CI, 1.003 to 1.260; p=0.045) were related to a higher self-documentation rate. Conclusion Age < 65 years, unmarried status, malignancy, and referral to a palliative care team were associated with patients making LST decisions themselves. Furthermore, the subject and timing of LST decisions have changed with the LST act.