Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the “probable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)” category in the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC) v2022 guidelines. Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients at risk of HCC who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI between January 2015 and June 2018; a subgroup of these patients also underwent liver CT. Eligible patients had at least one non-cystic lesion (≥10 mm) with a reference standard. Four radiologists interpreted the images independently and the results were pooled. The performance of “definite HCC” and “probable HCC” together and “probable HCC” alone were compared between v2018 and v2022. Results: A total of 2,237 patients (1,666 men; mean age, 59 ± 11 years) with 2,445 lesions were included. In v2022, 1.5% (143/9,780) of the lesions were additionally categorized as “probable HCC” by four reviewers on MRI; among these, 104 lesions were not HCCs. Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) or FNH-like nodules constituted 90.4% (94/104) of the false positives. When “definite HCC” and “probable HCC” were combined, v2022 showed higher sensitivity (83.7% [5,670/6,776] vs. 83.1% [5,631/6,776]) but lower specificity (77.1% [2,316/3,004] vs. 80.6% [2,420/3,004]) than v2018 (P < 0.001). For “probable HCC” alone, v2022 showed a lower positive predictive value (PPV) than v2018 (64.1% [373/582] vs. 76.1% [334/439], P < 0.001). In v2022, lesions with non-rim arterial-phase hyperenhancement (APHE) showed a lower PPV than those without APHE (42.3% [91/215] vs. 76.8% [282/367], P < 0.001). In the CT subgroup (n = 1,590), 1.6% (99/6,360) of the lesions were reassessed as “probable HCC,” and its PPV was 83.8% (83/99) in v2022 whereas no lesions were classified as “probable HCC” under v2018. Conclusion The revised “probable HCC” category in the KLCA-NCC v2022 aligns with updates in the diagnostic flow, demonstrating acceptable performance on MRI and CT. Notably, FNH or FNH-like nodules can be misclassified as “probable HCC” when MRI is used.

Purpose: Older cancer patients face unique challenges due to age-related physiological changes, increasing their vulnerability to treatment-related toxicities. Geriatric assessment (GA) is a validated tool for optimizing care, yet there is no consensus on integrating geriatric interventions into oncology. This study evaluates the feasibility of a tailored onco-geriatric intervention model incorporating the KG-7 screening tool. Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 30 patients aged ≥ 70 years with solid tumors undergoing adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy. Patients scoring ≤ 5 of KG-7 were eligible. Tailored interventions incorporating KG-7 included polypharmacy, functional status, mobility, nutrition, cognition, emotional well-being, insomnia, social support, and medical problem. KG-7, GA, and quality of life (QoL) were followed at 12 weeks. Results: Participants (median age, 79.5 years) had colon (43.3%), pancreatic (23.3%), or gastric cancer (23.3%). At baseline, most patients showed independent activities of daily living (100%)/instrumental activities of daily living (90%). However, 93.3% had abnormal GA. Particularly, 86.7% were either malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. The most frequently identified intervention needs included polypharmacy (70.0%), nutritional support (60.0%), and emotional well-being (50.0%) with high adherence (100.0%, 88.9%, and 46.7%, respectively). At 12 weeks, KG-7 scores improved in 43.8% of patients, and 69.2% of GA domains were improved. QoL analysis revealed modest improvement in Global Health Status (mean difference, 6.3; p=0.176). One-year survival rates were 92.3% and 79.4% for adjuvant and palliative groups, respectively. Conclusion The onco-geriatric intervention model incorporating KG-7 demonstrated high feasibility and potential to enhance clinical outcomes. Future studies should validate this approach in randomized trials to optimize care for older cancer patients.

Subglottic stenosis (SGS) and tracheal stenosis (TS) are rare conditions that can cause significant breathing difficulties and, if not properly managed, may lead to life-threatening complications. Despite their clinical importance, debate continues regarding the optimal management of adult SGS and TS, and no comprehensive guidelines have been established to date. The Korean Bronchoesophagological Society appointed a task force to develop clinical practice guidelines with the goal of providing evidence-based recommendations for managing SGS and TS in adults. The task force conducted a systematic review of the relevant literature by searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using predefined search terms aligned with key clinical questions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, which also informed the formulation and reporting of the recommendations. The strength of each recommendation reflects the guideline panel’s confidence that the benefits of an intervention outweigh its risks for eligible patients. After drafting the guidelines, feedback was obtained through Delphi questionnaires completed by members of the Korean Bronchoesophagological Society. Ultimately, the committee developed 17 evidence-based recommendations across four categories: initial evaluation, medical management, surgical treatment, and postoperative management and rehabilitation. These guidelines aim to support clinicians in delivering optimal care to adult patients with SGS and TS.

Background: Adequate tissue oxygenation is a key determinant of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) outcomes. Though transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO2) is the gold standard for evaluating tissue oxygenation, its limited availability restricts routine clinical use. Consequently, toe pressure is frequently utilized as a practical surrogate; however, the direct correlation between these two modalities has yet to be rigorously investigated. This study aimed to assess the correlation and agreement between TcPO2 and toe pressure in patients with DFUs. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 837 DFU patients who received simultaneous TcPO2 and toe pressure assessments. The correlation between the two tests was analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient, and agreement was evaluated using Bland–Altman analysis. To aid interpretation, a scatterplot and Bland–Altman plot were generated. Results: TcPO2 and toe pressure demonstrated a strong correlation (R=0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.70; P<0.001). Bland–Altman analysis showed a mean bias of 26.9 mmHg (standard deviation of differences, 28.8 mmHg; 95% limits of agreement, −28.9 to 82.6 mmHg) between toe pressure and TcPO2, reflecting limited agreement and increased variability at higher perfusion levels. Conclusion TcPO2 and toe pressure are strongly correlated. However, they are not interchangeable, particularly in DFU patients with high tissue perfusion.

Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with upfront FOLFIRINOX followed by local-regional therapy (LRT), surgical resection (SR), and radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to identify specific patient subgroups for which RT may serve as a reasonable alternative to SR for local tumor control. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients (SR group, n= 70; RT group, n= 46) at a single center between 2015 and 2020. Survival outcomes were compared based on LRT modalities, focusing on identifying subgroups in which RT provided an efficacy comparable to that of SR. Results: Among 116 patients, the SR group achieved a significantly higher 5-year overall survival (OS) than the RT group (27.1% vs. 8.7%, P< 0.0001), despite similar progression-free survival (P= 0.23). Significant prognostic factors for OS included carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response in BRPC (P= 0.02) and radiologic partial response in LAPC (P= 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that, while SR provided a survival advantage in CA19-9 responders, no significant difference in OS was observed between SR and RT in CA19-9 non-responders (P= 0.37). Conclusion Although surgery remains the gold standard, RT may be considered a justifiable local alternative for CA19-9 non-responders and surgically ineligible patients with LAPC, yielding comparable outcomes in these specific, biologically unfavorable subgroups.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

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.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

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.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.