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.

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.

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.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of Therapeutic Hypothermia (TH) in treating poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), focusing on functional outcomes, mortality, and complications such as vasospasm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), and hydrocephalus. Methods: Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central, up to November 2023. Nine studies involving 368 patients were selected based on eligibility criteria focusing on TH in poor-grade SAH patients. Data extraction, bias assessment, and evidence certainty were systematically performed. Results: The primary analysis of unfavorable outcomes in 271 participants showed no significant difference between the TH and standard care groups (risk ratio [RR], 0.87). However, a significant reduction in vasospasm was observed in the TH group (RR, 0.63) among 174 participants. No significant differences were found in DCI, hydrocephalus, and mortality rates in the respective participant groups. Conclusions: TH did not significantly improve primary unfavorable outcomes in poor-grade SAH patients. However, the reduction in vasospasm rates indicates potential specific benefits. The absence of significant findings in other secondary outcomes and mortality highlights the need for further research to better understand TH's role in treating this patient population.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.

Purpose: This single-arm phase II trial investigate the efficacy and safety of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Materials and Methods: Patients with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes were enrolled. Patients received S-1 (40-60 mg depending on patient’s body surface area, twice a day, day 1-14) and oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2, day 1) in 3 weeks cycle until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor 1.1. Secondary endpoints included time-to-progression (TTP), duration-of-response (DoR), overall survival (OS), and adverse events. Results: A total of 87 patients were enrolled from 11 institutions in Korea. Hormone receptor was positive in 54 (62.1%) patients and six (6.9%) had human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive disease. Forty-eight patients (85.1%) had visceral metastasis and 74 (55.2%) had more than three sites of metastases. The ORR of SOX regimen was 38.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 26.9 to 50.0) with a median TTP of 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 6.9). Median DoR and OS were 10.3 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 15.1) and 19.4 (95% CI, not estimated) months, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was reported in 28 patients (32.1%) and thrombocytopenia was observed in 23 patients (26.6%). Conclusion This phase II study showed that SOX regimen is a reasonable option in metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes.