The gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is one of the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Between the 1990s and early 2000s, GIST was identified as a tumor characterized by KIT or PDGFRA mutations, resulting in imatinib being established as an effective targeted therapy. However, with advances in molecular diagnostics, approximately 10%–15% of GISTs have been reported to harbor alternative mutations, such as those in the succinate dehydrogenase subunit genes and BRAF, leading to the development of additional targeted therapies. GISTs exhibit a wide spectrum of clinical behaviors, ranging from indolent to highly aggressive, prompting the development of diverse risk classification systems. However, multiple systems remain in use, leading to inconsistent pathologic reports. Moreover, the mitotic counting method—a key factor in risk stratification—has become a major source of confusion among pathologists owing to the adoption of digital pathology and discrepancies between updated international guidelines and outdated reimbursement requirements. These inconsistencies have hindered pathologic reporting and communication between pathologists and clinicians. This review comprehensively overviews the historical background, molecular subtypes, and risk classification systems of GIST, focusing on evolving issues in mitotic rate evaluation and the application of risk classification systems in clinical practice.

Purpose: The male predominance in the incidence of gastric cancer (GC) is established; however, sex differences in the prognosis of GC remain controversial. As such, this study analyzed the prognosis of patients with GC based on age and sex. Materials and Methods: Data from 14,739 patients diagnosed with GC at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between 2003 and 2023 were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, histological types of GC, overall and GC-specific survival rates (age and stage stratification), and associated risk factors were analyzed. Results: Females were significantly younger (p < 0.001) and exhibited more gastric body cancers (p < 0.001) and tumors with diffuse-type or poorly differentiated histology (p < 0.001) than males. Females exhibited an advantage over males in terms of overall survival (p=0.004), but not in GC-specific survival. However, age stratification revealed significant sex differences, that females < 50 years of age exhibited survival disadvantages (p < 0.001); however, this trend was reversed with age, and females > 60 years exhibited survival advantages (p < 0.001) for both overall and GC-specific survival. This may be explained by the lower ratio of diffuse-type GC as females age. Furthermore, in the analysis according to stage, females with stage IV disease exhibited significant survival disadvantages, with significantly younger age and a higher proportion of diffuse-type GC which exhibits aggressive features, resulting in poorer survival than in males. Conclusion Age and stage stratification revealed significant differences in survival between the sexes, which can be helpful for public health strategies.

Purpose: To develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-based personalized outcome prediction model for upper-urinary tract urothelial carcinoma patients undergoing radical nephroureterectomy. Materials and Methods: Data from patients who underwent radical nephroureterectomy between 2010 and 2020 across three hospitals were retrospectively analyzed. A model was developed using one tertiary center’s data and externally validated with data from two other hospitals. An AI model using XGBoost as risk estimator and bootstrapped Weibull Accelerated Failure Time model for 10-year survival probability was employed. Hyperparameter tuning used Optuna method. Model efficacy was assessed using concordance index, average Brier score, D-calibration, and six-month interval time-dependent area under the curve (AUC). Results: Of 1,039 patients, 627 qualified after excluding 50 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Model development used 564 patients (507 training, 57 test) with 9:1 stratified random split, plus 63 for internal validation and 362 for external validation. Significant parameters included preoperative glomerular filtration rate (p<0.001), hydroureteronephrosis (p=0.013), pathological N stage (p<0.001), concurrent carcinoma in situ (p<0.001), disease progression (p<0.001), and survival rate (p<0.001). Disease-free survival (DFS) model’s concordance index: internal validation 0.789, external validations 0.734 and 0.771. Overall survival (OS) model’s concordance index: internal validation 0.819, external validations 0.780 and 0.771. Mean time-dependent AUC was 0.66–0.77 for DFS and 0.67–0.80 for OS during 10-year periods. Conclusions AI-based model effectively predicts disease-free and OS outcomes for upper-urinary tract urothelial carcinoma patients with post-radical nephroureterectomy, showcasing robust performance across multicenter settings.

OBJECTIVES: Poor cardiovascular health (CVH) and the high prevalence of depressive symptoms represent significant public health concerns, underscoring the importance of examining their association. This study aimed to investigate the association between CVH, as defined by the American Heart Association’s 2022 Life’s Essential 8 (LE8) framework, and depressive symptoms. METHODS: This study used data from the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Overall CVH, measured using LE8, was categorized into 3 groups: low score (0–<50), moderate score (50–<80), and high score (80–100). LE8 comprises 2 subdomains: health behaviors and health factors. Depressive symptoms were defined as a total score ≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed, adjusting for sex, age, socioeconomic status, and current drinking status. RESULTS: Among 17,294 adults, 257 male and 681 female reported significant depressive symptoms. Compared with individuals in the low LE8 category (reference), the odds ratio (OR) for depressive symptoms was 0.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 to 0.40) for those in the high LE8 category. The OR for depressive symptoms was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.53) for individuals with a high health behavior score compared with those with a low health behavior score. In contrast, the health factor score was not significantly associated with depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that overall CVH, particularly the health behavior subdomain, was associated with lower odds of depressive symptoms. Prospective longitudinal studies are warranted to validate these findings and clarify the directionality of the observed associations.

Background: Complete revascularization has demonstrated better outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease. However, in the case of left main (LM) culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease, there is limited evidence to suggest that complete revascularization is better. Methods: We reviewed 16,831 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry who were treated from July 2016 to June 2020, and 399 patients were enrolled with LM culprit lesion AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. We categorized the patients as those treated with complete revascularization (n=295) or incomplete revascularization (n=104). The study endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analyzed the incidence of MACCE at 1 year. Results: After PSM, the two groups were well balanced. There was no significant difference between the two groups in MACCE at 1 year (12.1% vs. 15.2%; hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–2.74; p=0.524) after PSM. The components of MACCE and major bleeding were also not significantly different. Conclusion There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups treated with complete or incomplete revascularization for LM culprit lesion AMI with multivessel disease.

Purpose: Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys. Results: Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusions The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.

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.