1.Korean colorectal cancer screening guidelines for asymptomatic, average-risk adults: the 2025 revision
EunKyo KANG ; Jae Myung CHA ; Seo Young KANG ; Kiheon LEE ; Su Young KIM ; Younghoon KIM ; An Na SEO ; Hyo-Jin KANG ; Jong Keon JANG ; Kwang-Pil KO ; Aesun SHIN ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Youngki HONG ; Eun-Jung CHO ; Minje HAN ; Soo Young KIM ; Hyeon Ji LEE ; Chang Kyun CHOI ; Mina SUH
Journal of the Korean Medical Association 2026;69(3):268-280
Purpose:
To develop the 2025 update to the Korean colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines by systematically evaluating recent evidence, integrating domestic data, and addressing changes since the 2015 guideline revision, thereby providing an evidence-based standard for clinicians and policymakers.
Methods:
A multidisciplinary committee developed the guidelines using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The process included formulation of three key questions addressing screening efficacy, diagnostic accuracy, and optimal screening age and interval. A systematic review of international guidelines and primary literature was conducted, yielding 327 eligible studies. In addition, a utility-based analysis using a Markov model was performed to determine optimal screening ages and intervals.
Results:
The evidence synthesis identified high-certainty evidence supporting the use of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for reducing CRC mortality and moderate-certainty evidence for colonoscopy. Evidence for computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and stool DNA testing was rated as very low certainty. Based on the evidence review and cost-utility analysis, the committee conditionally recommends CRC screening for asymptomatic, average-risk adults aged 45–74 years using either colonoscopy every 10 years or FIT every 1–2 years. CTC and stool DNA testing were not recommended owing to insufficient evidence.
Conclusion
The 2025 Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening present updated, evidence-based recommendations tailored to the domestic healthcare context. By conditionally endorsing both colonoscopy and FIT for individuals aged 45–74 years, these guidelines aim to improve population-level screening effectiveness and reduce the burden of CRC in South Korea.
2.Surveillance of avian influenza viruses in migratory wild birds in South Korea, 2019–2025
Jae Kyung LEE ; Min Beom KIM ; Seo Hyeon KIM ; Song Hwi JEONG ; HaanWoo SUNG ; Hyung-Kwan JANG ; Kang-Seuk CHOI ; Daesung YOO ; Se-Hee AN ; Gyeong-Beom HEO ; Yong-Myung KANG ; Youn-Jeong LEE ; Kwang-Nyeong LEE ; Young Ju LEE
Journal of Veterinary Science 2026;27(2):07-2025
Objective:
We investigated the distribution of AI viruses in fecal samples from wild bird habitats (and nearby poultry-farm areas) surveyed between September and March from 2019 to 2025 and identified associated epidemiological risk factors.
Methods:
Samples were screened for influenza A (M, H5, H7) genes using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (PCR), subjected to virus isolation in embryonated chicken eggs, and subtyped by PCR and sequencing. Host species were identified through DNA barcoding. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were estimated for province, month, and waterfowl density.
Results:
Overall prevalence of HPAI and low pathogenic AI (LPAI) virus was 0.10% and 3.21%, respectively. HPAI virus was continuously isolated since 2020–2021, except 2019– 2020, while LPAI prevalence steadily increased (3.01%–4.35%). Twelve hemagglutinin (H1–H12) subtypes were identified in 1,722 isolates, and H3 (16.5%) was the most prevalent, followed by H5 (11.1%) and H7 (5.2%). LPAI H5N3 (55.7%) and H7N7 (75.5%) were the predominant H5 and H7 subtypes, respectively. Detection was higher in western coastal provinces, and higher mallard/spot-billed duck density and sampling in September– December were associated with increased risk.
Conclusions
and Relevance: Continued surveillance of migratory-bird habitats can provide early warning of HPAIV incursions and support targeted biosecurity measures in high-risk regions and seasons.
3.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
4.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
5.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2024: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach (Update of 2022 Guideline)
In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Wonyoung CHOI ; An Na SEO ; Bang Wool EOM ; Beodeul KANG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chang In CHOI ; Choong-kun LEE ; Ho Jung AN ; Hwa Kyung BYUN ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jang Ho CHO ; Kyoungjune PAK ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jae Seok BAE ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Jungyoon CHOI ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Miyoung CHOI ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Nieun SEO ; Sang Soo EOM ; Soomin AHN ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Sung Hee LIM ; Tae-Han KIM ; Hye Sook HAN ; On behalf of The Development Working Group for the Korean Practice Guideline for Gastric Cancer 2024
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(1):5-114
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.
6.Gender and Menopause Impact on Recurrence and Cancer-Specific Mortality in Bladder Cancer After Radical Cystectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Jee Soo PARK ; Won Sik JANG ; Jieun HEO ; Won Sik HAM ; Kyung Hwan KIM ; Jong Kil NAM ; Bum-Jin LIM ; Bum Sik HONG ; Wook NAM ; Sangchul LEE ; Jong Jin OH ; Seung Hwan JEONG ; Ja Hyeon KU ; Tae Il NOH ; Sung Gu KANG ; Seok Ho KANG ; Yun-Sok HA ; Tae Gyun KWON ; Tae‑Hwan KIM ; Jongchan KIM ; Geehyun SONG ; Ho Kyung SEO ; Wan SONG ; Hyun Hwan SUNG ; Byong Chang JEONG
Journal of Urologic Oncology 2025;23(1):88-93
Purpose:
Although bladder cancer occurs three to 4 times more frequently in men than in women, the relative number of deaths compared to incidence is higher in women, suggesting that women have a worse prognosis than men. Emerging evidence indicates that the activity of the sex steroid hormone pathway may play a role in bladder cancer development, with demonstrations that both androgens and estrogens have biological effects on bladder cancer in vitro and in vivo. This study investigates the influence of sex and menopausal status on recurrence and cancer-specific death (CSD) in bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC).
Materials and Methods:
This retrospective analysis included 3,913 patients from the Korean Bladder Cancer Study Group Database who underwent RC between 2010 and 2019. Patients were categorized based on gender and menopausal status (≤50 years: premenopausal; >50 years: postmenopausal). Pathological factors, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, recurrence, and CSD rates were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests.
Results:
Among the 3,913 patients, 400 (10.2%) were female. Premenopausal females exhibited significantly lower recurrence rates (28.6%) compared to postmenopausal females (45.7%). CSD rates were similarly reduced in premenopausal females (12.0% vs. 22.2% in postmenopausal females). No significant sex differences in recurrence or CSD were observed among premenopausal patients. Pathological T stage, nodal status, and lymphovascular invasion were significantly associated with recurrence in males, while nodal status alone was significant in females. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more frequently administered to male patients under the age of 50, while no difference was observed in the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy among female patients based on menopausal status.
Conclusion
Hormonal changes associated with menopause significantly influence bladder cancer outcomes in women. Premenopausal hormonal environments seem protective, underscoring the need for further research into hormone-driven mechanisms in bladder cancer.
7.Association of Delayed Denosumab Dosing with Increased Risk of Fractures: A Population-Based Retrospective Study
Kyoung Min KIM ; Seol A JANG ; Nam Ki HONG ; Chul Sik KIM ; Yumie RHEE ; Seok Won PARK ; Steven R. CUMMINGS ; Gi Hyeon SEO
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2024;39(6):946-955
Background:
Inhibitory effects of denosumab on bone remodeling are reversible and disappear once treatment is discontinued. Herein, we examined whether and to what extent delayed denosumab administration is also associated with fracture risk using nation-wide data.
Methods:
The study cohort included women aged 45 to 89 years who were started on denosumab for osteoporosis between October 2017 and December 2019 using data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment service. Participants were stratified according to the time of their subsequent denosumab administration from the last denosumab administration, including those with within 30 days early dosing (ED30), within the planned time of 180–210 days (referent), within 30–90 days of delayed dosing (DD90), within 90–180 days of delayed dosing (DD180), and longer than 181 days of delayed dosing (DD181+). The primary outcome was the incidence of all clinical fractures.
Results:
A total of 149,199 participants included and 2,323 all clinical fractures (including 1,223 vertebral fractures) occurred. The incidence of all fractures was significantly higher in the DD90 compared to reference group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 1.4). The risk of all fracture was even higher in the longer delayed DD180 group (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3) and DD181+ group (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.2). Increased risks of fractures with delayed dosing were consistently observed for vertebral fractures.
Conclusion
Delayed denosumab dosing, even by 1 to 3 months, was significantly associated with increased fracture risk. Maintaining the correct dosing schedule should be emphasized when starting denosumab.
8.Sex Differences in Chronic Cough Epidemiology: The Korean Cough Study Group
Jiyeon KANG ; Woo Jung SEO ; Jieun KANG ; Jung Gon KIM ; Sung Jun CHUNG ; Hyung Koo KANG ; Sung-Soon LEE ; Tai Joon AN ; Hyonsoo JOO ; Hyun LEE ; Youlim KIM ; Ina JEONG ; Jinkyeong PARK ; Sung-Kyoung KIM ; Jong-Wook SHIN ; Chin Kook RHEE ; Yee Hyung KIM ; Kyung Hoon MIN ; Ji-Yong MOON ; Deog Kyeom KIM ; Seung Hun JANG ; Kwang Ha YOO ; Jin Woo KIM ; Hyoung Kyu YOON ; Hyeon-Kyoung KOO
Journal of Korean Medical Science 2024;39(38):e273-
Background:
Chronic cough is a common symptom encountered by healthcare practitioners.The global prevalence of chronic cough is 9.6%, with a female predominance. The aim of our study is to reveal the sex differences in prevalence and severity of chronic cough in South Korea, stratified by age and etiology.
Methods:
This study included adult patients with chronic cough who were recruited from 19 respiratory centers in South Korea. Patients completed the cough numeric rating scale (NRS) and COugh Assessment Test (COAT) questionnaire to assess the severity and multidimensional impact of cough.
Results:
Among the 625 patients, 419 (67.0%) were females, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:2.03. The mean age was 49.4 years, and the median duration of cough was 12 weeks. The mean NRS and COAT scores were 5.5 ± 1.8 and 9.5 ± 3.6, respectively. Female patients were older (45.3 ± 15.4 vs. 51.6 ± 15.2, P < 0.001) and more likely to have asthma/cough variant asthma (CVA) (26.7% vs. 40.8%, P = 0.001) than male patients. There was no difference in the duration or severity of cough between sexes, regardless of the cause. The male-tofemale ratio was lower for upper airway cough syndrome (UACS), asthma/CVA, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but not for eosinophilic bronchitis (EB) or unexplained cough. The mean age of female patients was higher in UACS and asthma/CVA, but not in EB, GERD, or unexplained cough. The majority (24.2%) fell within the age category of 50s. The proportion of females with cough increased with age, with a significant rise in the 50s, 60s, and 70–89 age groups. The severity of cough decreased in the 50s, 60s, and 70–89 age groups, with no significant sex differences within the same age group.
Conclusion
The sex disparities in prevalence and severity of cough varied significantly depending on the age category and etiology. Understanding the specific sex-based difference could enhance comprehension of cough-related pathophysiology and treatment strategies.
9.Association of Delayed Denosumab Dosing with Increased Risk of Fractures: A Population-Based Retrospective Study
Kyoung Min KIM ; Seol A JANG ; Nam Ki HONG ; Chul Sik KIM ; Yumie RHEE ; Seok Won PARK ; Steven R. CUMMINGS ; Gi Hyeon SEO
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2024;39(6):946-955
Background:
Inhibitory effects of denosumab on bone remodeling are reversible and disappear once treatment is discontinued. Herein, we examined whether and to what extent delayed denosumab administration is also associated with fracture risk using nation-wide data.
Methods:
The study cohort included women aged 45 to 89 years who were started on denosumab for osteoporosis between October 2017 and December 2019 using data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment service. Participants were stratified according to the time of their subsequent denosumab administration from the last denosumab administration, including those with within 30 days early dosing (ED30), within the planned time of 180–210 days (referent), within 30–90 days of delayed dosing (DD90), within 90–180 days of delayed dosing (DD180), and longer than 181 days of delayed dosing (DD181+). The primary outcome was the incidence of all clinical fractures.
Results:
A total of 149,199 participants included and 2,323 all clinical fractures (including 1,223 vertebral fractures) occurred. The incidence of all fractures was significantly higher in the DD90 compared to reference group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 1.4). The risk of all fracture was even higher in the longer delayed DD180 group (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3) and DD181+ group (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.2). Increased risks of fractures with delayed dosing were consistently observed for vertebral fractures.
Conclusion
Delayed denosumab dosing, even by 1 to 3 months, was significantly associated with increased fracture risk. Maintaining the correct dosing schedule should be emphasized when starting denosumab.
10.Association of Delayed Denosumab Dosing with Increased Risk of Fractures: A Population-Based Retrospective Study
Kyoung Min KIM ; Seol A JANG ; Nam Ki HONG ; Chul Sik KIM ; Yumie RHEE ; Seok Won PARK ; Steven R. CUMMINGS ; Gi Hyeon SEO
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2024;39(6):946-955
Background:
Inhibitory effects of denosumab on bone remodeling are reversible and disappear once treatment is discontinued. Herein, we examined whether and to what extent delayed denosumab administration is also associated with fracture risk using nation-wide data.
Methods:
The study cohort included women aged 45 to 89 years who were started on denosumab for osteoporosis between October 2017 and December 2019 using data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment service. Participants were stratified according to the time of their subsequent denosumab administration from the last denosumab administration, including those with within 30 days early dosing (ED30), within the planned time of 180–210 days (referent), within 30–90 days of delayed dosing (DD90), within 90–180 days of delayed dosing (DD180), and longer than 181 days of delayed dosing (DD181+). The primary outcome was the incidence of all clinical fractures.
Results:
A total of 149,199 participants included and 2,323 all clinical fractures (including 1,223 vertebral fractures) occurred. The incidence of all fractures was significantly higher in the DD90 compared to reference group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 1.4). The risk of all fracture was even higher in the longer delayed DD180 group (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3) and DD181+ group (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.2). Increased risks of fractures with delayed dosing were consistently observed for vertebral fractures.
Conclusion
Delayed denosumab dosing, even by 1 to 3 months, was significantly associated with increased fracture risk. Maintaining the correct dosing schedule should be emphasized when starting denosumab.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail