Purpose: To develop the 2025 update to the Korean colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines by systematically evaluating recent evidence, integrating domestic data, and addressing changes since the 2015 guideline revision, thereby providing an evidence-based standard for clinicians and policymakers. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee developed the guidelines using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The process included formulation of three key questions addressing screening efficacy, diagnostic accuracy, and optimal screening age and interval. A systematic review of international guidelines and primary literature was conducted, yielding 327 eligible studies. In addition, a utility-based analysis using a Markov model was performed to determine optimal screening ages and intervals. Results: The evidence synthesis identified high-certainty evidence supporting the use of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for reducing CRC mortality and moderate-certainty evidence for colonoscopy. Evidence for computed tomographic colonography (CTC) and stool DNA testing was rated as very low certainty. Based on the evidence review and cost-utility analysis, the committee conditionally recommends CRC screening for asymptomatic, average-risk adults aged 45–74 years using either colonoscopy every 10 years or FIT every 1–2 years. CTC and stool DNA testing were not recommended owing to insufficient evidence. Conclusion The 2025 Korean Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening present updated, evidence-based recommendations tailored to the domestic healthcare context. By conditionally endorsing both colonoscopy and FIT for individuals aged 45–74 years, these guidelines aim to improve population-level screening effectiveness and reduce the burden of CRC in South Korea.

Background: The Korean National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) for gastric cancer requires economic evaluation due to the low sensitivity of upper gastrointestinal series (UGIs) and the associated low cancer survival rate. This study aimed to ascertain the most cost-effective strategy for the NCSP. Methods: The hypothetical target population of this study was aged 40 years or older, and no actual participants were involved. Markov simulation models were constructed for 25 strategies, combinations of 1) screening methods (UGIs or endoscopy vs. endoscopy-only), 2) screening intervals (one, two, or three-year), and 3) upper age limit of screening (69, 74, 79 years old, or “no limit”). Costs, utility, and other input parameters were extracted from various databases and previous studies. Cost-utility, sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: The endoscopy-only strategy with a three-year interval with an upper age limit of 69 was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-utility ratio of KRW 13,354,106 per quality-adjusted life years. According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the uncertainty of the result was significantly small. Scenario analysis is showed that as the screening rate increased, the endoscopy-only strategy saved more costs compared to the current NCSP. Therefore, it is important to maintain a high screening rate when altering the NCSP strategy. Conclusion Endoscopy-only screening was more cost-effective method than UGIs for the NCSP. Furthermore, a three-year interval with an upper-age limit of 69 years was the most cost-effective strategy. Efforts to improve cost-effective screening guidelines will support the efficient use of medical resources. Additionally, maintaining a higher screening rate may maximize the impact of the modification in strategy on cost-effectiveness.

Background: The Korean National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) for gastric cancer requires economic evaluation due to the low sensitivity of upper gastrointestinal series (UGIs) and the associated low cancer survival rate. This study aimed to ascertain the most cost-effective strategy for the NCSP. Methods: The hypothetical target population of this study was aged 40 years or older, and no actual participants were involved. Markov simulation models were constructed for 25 strategies, combinations of 1) screening methods (UGIs or endoscopy vs. endoscopy-only), 2) screening intervals (one, two, or three-year), and 3) upper age limit of screening (69, 74, 79 years old, or “no limit”). Costs, utility, and other input parameters were extracted from various databases and previous studies. Cost-utility, sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: The endoscopy-only strategy with a three-year interval with an upper age limit of 69 was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-utility ratio of KRW 13,354,106 per quality-adjusted life years. According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the uncertainty of the result was significantly small. Scenario analysis is showed that as the screening rate increased, the endoscopy-only strategy saved more costs compared to the current NCSP. Therefore, it is important to maintain a high screening rate when altering the NCSP strategy. Conclusion Endoscopy-only screening was more cost-effective method than UGIs for the NCSP. Furthermore, a three-year interval with an upper-age limit of 69 years was the most cost-effective strategy. Efforts to improve cost-effective screening guidelines will support the efficient use of medical resources. Additionally, maintaining a higher screening rate may maximize the impact of the modification in strategy on cost-effectiveness.

Objective: Mammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. Materials and Methods: We analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics—including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea’s 237 districts, stratified by age groups. Results: From 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time. Conclusion While mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.

Objective: Mammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. Materials and Methods: We analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics—including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea’s 237 districts, stratified by age groups. Results: From 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time. Conclusion While mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.

Background: The Korean National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) for gastric cancer requires economic evaluation due to the low sensitivity of upper gastrointestinal series (UGIs) and the associated low cancer survival rate. This study aimed to ascertain the most cost-effective strategy for the NCSP. Methods: The hypothetical target population of this study was aged 40 years or older, and no actual participants were involved. Markov simulation models were constructed for 25 strategies, combinations of 1) screening methods (UGIs or endoscopy vs. endoscopy-only), 2) screening intervals (one, two, or three-year), and 3) upper age limit of screening (69, 74, 79 years old, or “no limit”). Costs, utility, and other input parameters were extracted from various databases and previous studies. Cost-utility, sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: The endoscopy-only strategy with a three-year interval with an upper age limit of 69 was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-utility ratio of KRW 13,354,106 per quality-adjusted life years. According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the uncertainty of the result was significantly small. Scenario analysis is showed that as the screening rate increased, the endoscopy-only strategy saved more costs compared to the current NCSP. Therefore, it is important to maintain a high screening rate when altering the NCSP strategy. Conclusion Endoscopy-only screening was more cost-effective method than UGIs for the NCSP. Furthermore, a three-year interval with an upper-age limit of 69 years was the most cost-effective strategy. Efforts to improve cost-effective screening guidelines will support the efficient use of medical resources. Additionally, maintaining a higher screening rate may maximize the impact of the modification in strategy on cost-effectiveness.

Background: The Korean National Cancer Screening Program (NCSP) for gastric cancer requires economic evaluation due to the low sensitivity of upper gastrointestinal series (UGIs) and the associated low cancer survival rate. This study aimed to ascertain the most cost-effective strategy for the NCSP. Methods: The hypothetical target population of this study was aged 40 years or older, and no actual participants were involved. Markov simulation models were constructed for 25 strategies, combinations of 1) screening methods (UGIs or endoscopy vs. endoscopy-only), 2) screening intervals (one, two, or three-year), and 3) upper age limit of screening (69, 74, 79 years old, or “no limit”). Costs, utility, and other input parameters were extracted from various databases and previous studies. Cost-utility, sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: The endoscopy-only strategy with a three-year interval with an upper age limit of 69 was the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-utility ratio of KRW 13,354,106 per quality-adjusted life years. According to the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the uncertainty of the result was significantly small. Scenario analysis is showed that as the screening rate increased, the endoscopy-only strategy saved more costs compared to the current NCSP. Therefore, it is important to maintain a high screening rate when altering the NCSP strategy. Conclusion Endoscopy-only screening was more cost-effective method than UGIs for the NCSP. Furthermore, a three-year interval with an upper-age limit of 69 years was the most cost-effective strategy. Efforts to improve cost-effective screening guidelines will support the efficient use of medical resources. Additionally, maintaining a higher screening rate may maximize the impact of the modification in strategy on cost-effectiveness.

Objective: Mammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. Materials and Methods: We analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics—including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea’s 237 districts, stratified by age groups. Results: From 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time. Conclusion While mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.

Objective: Mammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. Materials and Methods: We analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics—including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea’s 237 districts, stratified by age groups. Results: From 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time. Conclusion While mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.

Objective: Mammography is essential for reducing breast cancer mortality; however, its performance varies globally. This study aimed to evaluate mammography screening outcomes in Korea over 12 years and investigate regional variations. Materials and Methods: We analyzed mammography data from 42 million Korean women, aged 40 years and older, who participated in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) from 2009 to 2020. Performance metrics—including recall rate (RR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate (FPR), cancer detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), and dense breast rate (DBR), were computed. Twelve-year trends in these metrics were analyzed using Joinpoint regression. Regional variations were also examined across Korea’s 237 districts, stratified by age groups. Results: From 2009 to 2020, 42165405 mammography screenings were conducted through the KNCSP, increasing from 2821132 screenings in 2009 to 3596204 in 2020. The RR decreased from 17.2% in 2009 to 11.2% in 2020 (average annual percent change [AAPC] = -3.7%), while the PPV increased from 0.8% to 2.8%; AAPC = 10.7%), the CDR increased from 1.5 to 3.1 per 1000; AAPC = 7.3%), and the ICR rose from 0.9 to 1.6 per 1000; (AAPC = 5.2%). Regional variations were noted; however, differences in the RR, sensitivity, specificity, and FPR decreased over time. Conclusion While mammography performance improved from 2009 to 2020, the PPV and sensitivity remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for continuous monitoring. Regional disparities in performance, although reduced, persist. These findings provide essential baseline data for improving mammography quality and addressing inequities in breast cancer screening.