Background: Baricitinib is one of the front-runners among targeted agents for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). Although many studies have been conducted on the real-world use of baricitinib, the sample size is often small and data is focused primarily on Caucasians. Objective: The objective of this study was to demonstrate the real-world itch-relieving property of baricitinib in adult AD patients in South Korea. Methods: Electronic medical records of AD patients treated with baricitinib at the National Medical Center in Korea from May 2021 to April 2023 were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Seventy patients completed 16 to 52 weeks of baricitinib treatment, with most patients showing mild-to-moderate baseline lesions and moderate-to-severe baseline itch. At Week 16 of baricitinib treatment, there was a 50% reduction in Itch numerical rating scale from baseline, and 50.7% of patients showed 50% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index score.The efficacy of baricitinib was also reflected in the patient reported outcomes, with 55%–58% improvements in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool, and Dermatology Life Quality Index scores seen within 2 weeks of treatment. No new safety signals were detected in this study. Conclusion Baricitinib treatment for 52 weeks in Korean patients with itch dominant AD confirmed long term effectiveness and safety.

Purpose: Due to its rarity, treatment guidelines for appendiceal cancer have traditionally followed those established for colorectal cancer, despite showing distinct histologic and clinical features. This study aimed to compare the clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term oncologic outcomes of appendiceal cancer with those of right-sided colon cancers. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with stage I–III appendiceal, cecal, or ascending colon cancer who underwent curative resection between 2010 and 2020 at our center. A 1:3:3 exact matching for age, sex, TNM stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy was performed. Survival outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. Results: Overall, 245 patients with appendiceal cancer (n = 35), ascending colon cancer (n = 105), and cecal cancer (n = 105) were analyzed. Appendiceal cancer exhibited a higher proportion of T4 tumors and fewer harvested lymph nodes compared with ascending or cecal cancers. The mean follow-up duration was 9.5 years. The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were lower in appendiceal cancer (66.2% and 52.9%) than in ascending (91.2% and 78.4%) or cecal cancer (88.5% and 78.3%). Similarly, the 10-year disease-free survival rate was lower in appendiceal cancer (59.2%) compared with ascending (83.1%) and cecal cancers (78.4%). Cox regression analysis identified age (≥65 years), perforation, nodal metastasis, and lymphovascular invasion as independent predictors of poor prognosis. Conclusion Appendiceal cancer exhibited significantly worse long-term survival compared to cecal or ascending colon cancer. Tumor perforation, nodal metastasis, and lymphovascular invasion were adverse prognostic factors for overall and disease-free survival.

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.

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.

Helicobacter pylori causes gastric cancer and peptic ulcers, and eradication therapy can reduce the incidence of cancer in high-risk groups. In Korea, discrepancies between the reimbursement criteria and clinical guidelines create clinical challenges. This study investigated the perceptions and practices of experts regarding H. pylori testing during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and any subsequent eradication therapy. An anonymous 8-question survey was conducted among 51 experts attending the 2024 Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research Summer Workshop. Only 2% of the experts tested all patients. Testing was performed in 54% of patients with a family history of gastric cancer, 32% of those with atrophic gastritis, 42% of those with dyspeptic symptoms, and 62% of those with iron-deficiency anemia. Among patients with suspected infections (based on endoscopic findings) and eligible for selective reimbursement, 82% underwent H. pylori testing. Age did not influence testing decisions for 60% of the experts, and 57% considered factors other than age when deciding on eradication therapy. The practices of the experts varied depending on the patient’s clinical condition and economic burden. Aligning clinical guidelines with the reimbursement criteria is necessary to reduce confusion and ensure appropriate patient care.

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.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.