Purpose: The novel curability criteria for elderly (EL) patients have been proposed to stratify their risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM), following non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC). Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the EL criteria and compare them with those of the well-known eCura system. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 143 patients who did not meet the curative ESD criteria at a tertiary hospital in Korea between 2011 and 2022. Of these, 102 underwent additional surgery, while 41 were followed up without further treatment. The LNM rates based on the EL and eCura systems were stratified and compared. Results: In the surgery group, 29.4% (30/102) patients were classified as EL-low (EL-L) and 70.2% (72/102) as EL-high (EL-H). The LNM rates (95% confidence interval) were 0.0% (0.0–11.6) and 9.7% (4.0–19.0) for EL-L and EL-H, respectively (P=0.102). EL-L was closely aligned with the eCura low-risk category, with a similar patient proportion (32.4%) and an LNM rate of 0.0% (0.0–10.6). The eCura system classified 94.1% (48/51) of the EL-L patients as lowrisk, with an 86% concordance rate (123/143). Discordant cases included patients with positive vertical margins, but without other risk factors, who were classified as EL-H without LNM. Conclusions Patients with EL-L showed no LNM, and the EL criteria demonstrated high concordance with the eCura system. The EL criteria may be as effective as the eCura system in identifying low-risk patients after non-curative ESD for EGC.

Purpose: The novel curability criteria for elderly (EL) patients have been proposed to stratify their risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM), following non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC). Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the EL criteria and compare them with those of the well-known eCura system. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 143 patients who did not meet the curative ESD criteria at a tertiary hospital in Korea between 2011 and 2022. Of these, 102 underwent additional surgery, while 41 were followed up without further treatment. The LNM rates based on the EL and eCura systems were stratified and compared. Results: In the surgery group, 29.4% (30/102) patients were classified as EL-low (EL-L) and 70.2% (72/102) as EL-high (EL-H). The LNM rates (95% confidence interval) were 0.0% (0.0–11.6) and 9.7% (4.0–19.0) for EL-L and EL-H, respectively (P=0.102). EL-L was closely aligned with the eCura low-risk category, with a similar patient proportion (32.4%) and an LNM rate of 0.0% (0.0–10.6). The eCura system classified 94.1% (48/51) of the EL-L patients as lowrisk, with an 86% concordance rate (123/143). Discordant cases included patients with positive vertical margins, but without other risk factors, who were classified as EL-H without LNM. Conclusions Patients with EL-L showed no LNM, and the EL criteria demonstrated high concordance with the eCura system. The EL criteria may be as effective as the eCura system in identifying low-risk patients after non-curative ESD for EGC.

Purpose: The novel curability criteria for elderly (EL) patients have been proposed to stratify their risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM), following non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC). Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the EL criteria and compare them with those of the well-known eCura system. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 143 patients who did not meet the curative ESD criteria at a tertiary hospital in Korea between 2011 and 2022. Of these, 102 underwent additional surgery, while 41 were followed up without further treatment. The LNM rates based on the EL and eCura systems were stratified and compared. Results: In the surgery group, 29.4% (30/102) patients were classified as EL-low (EL-L) and 70.2% (72/102) as EL-high (EL-H). The LNM rates (95% confidence interval) were 0.0% (0.0–11.6) and 9.7% (4.0–19.0) for EL-L and EL-H, respectively (P=0.102). EL-L was closely aligned with the eCura low-risk category, with a similar patient proportion (32.4%) and an LNM rate of 0.0% (0.0–10.6). The eCura system classified 94.1% (48/51) of the EL-L patients as lowrisk, with an 86% concordance rate (123/143). Discordant cases included patients with positive vertical margins, but without other risk factors, who were classified as EL-H without LNM. Conclusions Patients with EL-L showed no LNM, and the EL criteria demonstrated high concordance with the eCura system. The EL criteria may be as effective as the eCura system in identifying low-risk patients after non-curative ESD for EGC.

Purpose: The original eCura system was designed to stratify the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) after endoscopic resection (ER) in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC).We assessed the effectiveness of a modified eCura system for reflecting the characteristics of undifferentiated-type (UD)-EGC. Materials and Methods: Six hundred thirty-four patients who underwent non-curative ER for UD-EGC and received either additional surgery (radical surgery group; n=270) or no further treatment (no additional treatment group; n=364) from 18 institutions between 2005 and 2015 were retrospectively included in this study. The eCuraU system assigned 1 point each for tumors >20 mm in size, ulceration, positive vertical margin, and submucosal invasion <500 µm; 2 points for submucosal invasion ≥500 µm; and 3 points for lymphovascular invasion. Results: LNM rates in the radical surgery group were 1.1%, 5.4%, and 13.3% for the low-(0–1 point), intermediate- (2–3 points), and high-risk (4–8 points), respectively (P-fortrend<0.001). The eCuraU system showed a significantly higher probability of identifying patients with LNM as high-risk than the eCura system (66.7% vs. 22.2%; McNemar P<0.001).In the no additional treatment group, overall survival (93.4%, 87.2%, and 67.6% at 5 years) and cancer-specific survival (99.6%, 98.9%, and 92.9% at 5 years) differed significantly among the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories, respectively (both P<0.001). In the high-risk category, surgery outperformed no treatment in terms of overall mortality (hazard ratio, 3.26; P=0.015). Conclusions The eCuraU system stratified the risk of LNM in patients with UD-EGC after ER. It is strongly recommended that high-risk patients undergo additional surgery.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the current smoking prevalence among adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection to that of the general Korean population and analyzed changes in smoking prevalence and cessation rates from 2009 to 2020. METHODS: The study included a total of 10,980 adults with HIV infection who underwent a health screening examination (National Health Insurance Service-National Health Information Database; NHIS-NHID), 1,230 individuals with HIV infection who participated in the Korea HIV/AIDS Cohort (KoCosHIV), and 76,783 participants from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). We estimated the current smoking prevalence and the quit ratio, defined as the ratio of former smokers to ever-smokers. RESULTS: In the NHIS-NHID and KoCosHIV studies, the prevalence of current and former smoking among adults with HIV was 44.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.1) and 15.6% (95% CI, 14.9 to 16.3), and 47.7% (95% CI, 43.7 to 51.8) and 16.9% (95% CI, 11.8 to 22.0), respectively. In the KNHANES, these rates were 22.5% and 18.1%, respectively. The standardized prevalence ratio of current smoking among adults with HIV was 1.76 in the NHIS-NHID and 1.97 in the KoCosHIV. Furthermore, the likelihood of quitting smoking was lower among adults with HIV than in the general population (NHIS-NHID: 26.1%; 95% CI, 25.0 to 27.1; KoCosHIV: 26.2%; 95% CI, 20.2 to 32.1; KNHANES: 44.6%; 95% CI, 44.5 to 44.6). Among HIV-positive adults, there was a 1.53% decline in the current smoking rate and a 2.86% increase in the quit ratio. CONCLUSIONS Adults with HIV were more likely to smoke and less likely to quit smoking than the general adult population. Tobacco screening and cessation strategies should specifically target this population.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the current smoking prevalence among adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection to that of the general Korean population and analyzed changes in smoking prevalence and cessation rates from 2009 to 2020. METHODS: The study included a total of 10,980 adults with HIV infection who underwent a health screening examination (National Health Insurance Service-National Health Information Database; NHIS-NHID), 1,230 individuals with HIV infection who participated in the Korea HIV/AIDS Cohort (KoCosHIV), and 76,783 participants from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). We estimated the current smoking prevalence and the quit ratio, defined as the ratio of former smokers to ever-smokers. RESULTS: In the NHIS-NHID and KoCosHIV studies, the prevalence of current and former smoking among adults with HIV was 44.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.1) and 15.6% (95% CI, 14.9 to 16.3), and 47.7% (95% CI, 43.7 to 51.8) and 16.9% (95% CI, 11.8 to 22.0), respectively. In the KNHANES, these rates were 22.5% and 18.1%, respectively. The standardized prevalence ratio of current smoking among adults with HIV was 1.76 in the NHIS-NHID and 1.97 in the KoCosHIV. Furthermore, the likelihood of quitting smoking was lower among adults with HIV than in the general population (NHIS-NHID: 26.1%; 95% CI, 25.0 to 27.1; KoCosHIV: 26.2%; 95% CI, 20.2 to 32.1; KNHANES: 44.6%; 95% CI, 44.5 to 44.6). Among HIV-positive adults, there was a 1.53% decline in the current smoking rate and a 2.86% increase in the quit ratio. CONCLUSIONS Adults with HIV were more likely to smoke and less likely to quit smoking than the general adult population. Tobacco screening and cessation strategies should specifically target this population.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the current smoking prevalence among adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection to that of the general Korean population and analyzed changes in smoking prevalence and cessation rates from 2009 to 2020. METHODS: The study included a total of 10,980 adults with HIV infection who underwent a health screening examination (National Health Insurance Service-National Health Information Database; NHIS-NHID), 1,230 individuals with HIV infection who participated in the Korea HIV/AIDS Cohort (KoCosHIV), and 76,783 participants from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). We estimated the current smoking prevalence and the quit ratio, defined as the ratio of former smokers to ever-smokers. RESULTS: In the NHIS-NHID and KoCosHIV studies, the prevalence of current and former smoking among adults with HIV was 44.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.1) and 15.6% (95% CI, 14.9 to 16.3), and 47.7% (95% CI, 43.7 to 51.8) and 16.9% (95% CI, 11.8 to 22.0), respectively. In the KNHANES, these rates were 22.5% and 18.1%, respectively. The standardized prevalence ratio of current smoking among adults with HIV was 1.76 in the NHIS-NHID and 1.97 in the KoCosHIV. Furthermore, the likelihood of quitting smoking was lower among adults with HIV than in the general population (NHIS-NHID: 26.1%; 95% CI, 25.0 to 27.1; KoCosHIV: 26.2%; 95% CI, 20.2 to 32.1; KNHANES: 44.6%; 95% CI, 44.5 to 44.6). Among HIV-positive adults, there was a 1.53% decline in the current smoking rate and a 2.86% increase in the quit ratio. CONCLUSIONS Adults with HIV were more likely to smoke and less likely to quit smoking than the general adult population. Tobacco screening and cessation strategies should specifically target this population.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the current smoking prevalence among adults with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection to that of the general Korean population and analyzed changes in smoking prevalence and cessation rates from 2009 to 2020. METHODS: The study included a total of 10,980 adults with HIV infection who underwent a health screening examination (National Health Insurance Service-National Health Information Database; NHIS-NHID), 1,230 individuals with HIV infection who participated in the Korea HIV/AIDS Cohort (KoCosHIV), and 76,783 participants from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). We estimated the current smoking prevalence and the quit ratio, defined as the ratio of former smokers to ever-smokers. RESULTS: In the NHIS-NHID and KoCosHIV studies, the prevalence of current and former smoking among adults with HIV was 44.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.2 to 45.1) and 15.6% (95% CI, 14.9 to 16.3), and 47.7% (95% CI, 43.7 to 51.8) and 16.9% (95% CI, 11.8 to 22.0), respectively. In the KNHANES, these rates were 22.5% and 18.1%, respectively. The standardized prevalence ratio of current smoking among adults with HIV was 1.76 in the NHIS-NHID and 1.97 in the KoCosHIV. Furthermore, the likelihood of quitting smoking was lower among adults with HIV than in the general population (NHIS-NHID: 26.1%; 95% CI, 25.0 to 27.1; KoCosHIV: 26.2%; 95% CI, 20.2 to 32.1; KNHANES: 44.6%; 95% CI, 44.5 to 44.6). Among HIV-positive adults, there was a 1.53% decline in the current smoking rate and a 2.86% increase in the quit ratio. CONCLUSIONS Adults with HIV were more likely to smoke and less likely to quit smoking than the general adult population. Tobacco screening and cessation strategies should specifically target this population.

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.