Objective: To evaluate the performance of supplemental automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) added to mammography-based breast cancer screening for women with nondense breasts. Materials and Methods: A retrospective search of radiology databases at two tertiary institutions identified asymptomatic women with nondense breasts who underwent breast cancer screening using both digital mammography (DM) and supplemental ABUS between January 2020 and December 2023. We excluded women without sufficient follow-up data or those without an established final diagnosis, including histopathologic results. The performance measures of DM alone and ABUS combined with DM (ABUS plus DM) were compared. The primary outcome was the cancer detection rate (CDR), and the secondary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity. Subgroup analyses were performed for women with scattered fibroglandular density and almost entirely fatty breasts. Results: A total of 2,904 pairs of screening examinations were performed in 1,683 women (59 ± 10 years), detecting 26 cancers. In comparison with DM alone, ABUS plus DM showed higher CDR (9.0 vs. 7.9 per 1,000 examinations, P < 0.001), higher sensitivity (100% [26/26] vs. 88.5% [23/26], P < 0.001), and lower specificity (95.0% [2,735/2,878] vs. 97.9% [2,817/2,878], P < 0.001). In women with scattered fibroglandular density, ABUS increased the CDR from 7.4 to 8.5 per 1,000 examinations and improved the sensitivity from 87.0% [20/23] to 100% [23/23] (P < 0.001). In women with almost entirely fatty breasts, ABUS plus DM showed the same CDR (16.4 per 1,000 examinations) and sensitivity (100% [3/3]) as DM alone. Three cancers (11.5% [3/26]), all of which were stage T1N0, were detected only by supplemental ABUS. Conclusion Supplemental ABUS improved cancer detection and sensitivity in women with nondense breasts, with the benefits primarily observed in those with scattered fibroglandular density.

Background: and Purpose Although gastrointestinal (GI) surgery can affect drug efficacy, its impact on oral anticoagulants (OACs) remains unclear. This study investigated the impact of GI surgery on the comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin in atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: Using a nationwide South Korean claims database, AF patients prescribed OACs between 2015 and 2021 were analyzed. The primary outcome was ischemic stroke, and secondary outcomes were major bleeding, all-cause death, and composite outcome (ischemic stroke, major bleeding, all-cause death). Outcomes were compared by OAC type (DOAC vs. warfarin) and GI surgery status using inverse probability of treatment weighting and a Fine–Gray subdistribution hazard model with time-varying covariates. Results: Among 388,214 AF patients (mean age, 71.9 yr; 42.7% male), 6,907 (1.8%) underwent GI surgery. The effect of GI surgery differed between warfarin and DOACs for ischemic stroke (Pint= 0.018), with increased risk for warfarin (adjusted HR [aHR]: 2.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17–4.62), but not for DOACs (aHR: 0.97 [95% CI 0.77–1.22]) after surgery. Effects of surgery on major bleeding, all-cause death, and composite outcome did not differ. In post–GI surgery setting, DOACs demonstrated lower ischemic stroke risk (aHR: 0.35 [95% CI 0.17–0.72]) and comparable risks for other outcomes. Exploratory analyses by surgery location suggested a more favorable profile of DOACs after upper GI surgery. Conclusions In AF patients, GI surgery significantly increased ischemic stroke risk among warfarin users, but not among DOAC users. DOACs showed generally favorable profiles after GI surgery and may remain a reasonable anticoagulant, with potentially more favorable profile after upper GI surgery.

Synthetic data, generated using advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, replicates the statistical properties of real-world datasets while excluding identifiable information.Although synthetic data does not consist of actual data points, it is derived from original datasets, thereby enabling analyses that yield results comparable to those obtained with real data. Synthetic datasets are evaluated based on their utility—a measure of how effectively they mirror real data for analytical purposes. This paper presents the generation of synthetic datasets through the Healthcare Big Data Showcase Project (2019–2023). The original dataset comprises comprehensive multi-omics data from 400 individuals, including cancer survivors, chronic disease patients, and healthy participants. Synthetic data facilitates efficient access and robust analyses, serving as a practical tool for research and education. It addresses privacy concerns, supports AI research, and provides a foundation for innovative applications across diverse fields, such as public health and precision medicine.

Synthetic data, generated using advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, replicates the statistical properties of real-world datasets while excluding identifiable information.Although synthetic data does not consist of actual data points, it is derived from original datasets, thereby enabling analyses that yield results comparable to those obtained with real data. Synthetic datasets are evaluated based on their utility—a measure of how effectively they mirror real data for analytical purposes. This paper presents the generation of synthetic datasets through the Healthcare Big Data Showcase Project (2019–2023). The original dataset comprises comprehensive multi-omics data from 400 individuals, including cancer survivors, chronic disease patients, and healthy participants. Synthetic data facilitates efficient access and robust analyses, serving as a practical tool for research and education. It addresses privacy concerns, supports AI research, and provides a foundation for innovative applications across diverse fields, such as public health and precision medicine.

Background: Primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative disorders (pcCD30-LPDs) are a diseases with various clinical and prognostic characteristics. Objective: Increasing our knowledge of the clinical characteristics of pcCD30-LPDs and identifying potential prognostic variables in an Asian population. Methods: Clinicopathological features and survival data of pcCD30-LPD cases obtained from 22 hospitals in South Korea were examined. Results: A total of 413 cases of pcCD30-LPDs (lymphomatoid papulosis [LYP], n=237; primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma [C-ALCL], n=176) were included. Ninety percent of LYP patients and roughly 50% of C-ALCL patients presented with multiple skin lesions. Both LYP and C-ALCL affected the lower limbs most frequently. Multiplicity and advanced T stage of LYP lesions were associated with a chronic course longer than 6 months. Clinical morphology with patch lesions and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase were significantly associated with LPDs during follow-up in LYP patients. Extracutaneous involvement of C-ALCL occurred in 13.2% of patients. Lesions larger than 5 cm and increased serum lactate dehydrogenase were associated with a poor prognosis in C-ALCL. The survival of patients with C-ALCL was unaffected by the anatomical locations of skin lesions or other pathological factors. Conclusion The multiplicity or size of skin lesions was associated with a chronic course of LYP and survival among patients with C-ALCL.

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.

Objectives: This study was performed to evaluate the utilization patterns of acid suppressants following the withdrawal of ranitidine in Korea. Methods: Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service (HIRA) data from January 2016 to May 2023 were utilized to assess the usage of histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for acid-related diseases. Drug utilization was calculated for each agent based on the defined daily dose (DDD). To evaluate changes in utilization following the ranitidine recall, an interrupted time series analysis was conducted using segmented linear regression and an autoregressive integrated moving average model. Results: Before the withdrawal of ranitidine, the DDD per 100 000 inhabitants per day was increasing by 6.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.7 to 9.0) for H2RAs and by 19.3 (95% CI, 16.9 to 21.8) for PPIs each month. After the recall, H2RA utilization immediately declined by -1041.7 (95% CI, -1115.8 to -967.7), followed by a monthly increase of 6.6 (95% CI, 3.7 to 9.6) above the previous trend. PPI utilization temporarily surged by 235.2 (95% CI, 149.1 to 321.3), then displayed a monthly increase of 4.1 (95% CI, 0.7 to 7.6) on top of the pre-recall trend. Among PPIs, esomeprazole and rabeprazole demonstrated notable increases, representing the most commonly used acid suppressants in 2023. Conclusions PPI usage rose prominently following the withdrawal of ranitidine from the market. Considering the potential adverse effects of PPIs, further research is necessary to evaluate the public health implications of shifts in the utilization of acid suppressants.

Synthetic data, generated using advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, replicates the statistical properties of real-world datasets while excluding identifiable information.Although synthetic data does not consist of actual data points, it is derived from original datasets, thereby enabling analyses that yield results comparable to those obtained with real data. Synthetic datasets are evaluated based on their utility—a measure of how effectively they mirror real data for analytical purposes. This paper presents the generation of synthetic datasets through the Healthcare Big Data Showcase Project (2019–2023). The original dataset comprises comprehensive multi-omics data from 400 individuals, including cancer survivors, chronic disease patients, and healthy participants. Synthetic data facilitates efficient access and robust analyses, serving as a practical tool for research and education. It addresses privacy concerns, supports AI research, and provides a foundation for innovative applications across diverse fields, such as public health and precision medicine.

Synthetic data, generated using advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, replicates the statistical properties of real-world datasets while excluding identifiable information.Although synthetic data does not consist of actual data points, it is derived from original datasets, thereby enabling analyses that yield results comparable to those obtained with real data. Synthetic datasets are evaluated based on their utility—a measure of how effectively they mirror real data for analytical purposes. This paper presents the generation of synthetic datasets through the Healthcare Big Data Showcase Project (2019–2023). The original dataset comprises comprehensive multi-omics data from 400 individuals, including cancer survivors, chronic disease patients, and healthy participants. Synthetic data facilitates efficient access and robust analyses, serving as a practical tool for research and education. It addresses privacy concerns, supports AI research, and provides a foundation for innovative applications across diverse fields, such as public health and precision medicine.

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.