Purpose: Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys. Results: Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusions The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.

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: The diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) often relies on pleural fluid adenosine deaminase (ADA) levels. The diagnostic utility of ADA, however, is influenced by the prevalence of tuberculosis (TB) in local populations. Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) cases can exhibit moderately elevated ADA levels comparable to those seen in TPE. As population aging potentially impacts ADA levels, global TB incidence is decreasing whereas the burden of malignancy is on the rise. Consequently, epidemiological shifts and temporal changes in ADA distribution complicate the differential diagnosis between TPE and MPE when ADA levels are within the 40–70 IU/L range. Nonetheless, data specific to this subset are scarce. Methods: This retrospective study included consecutive patients aged > 18 years with confirmed TPE and MPE, spanning from 2012 to 2023. ADA levels in pleural fluid were categorized into three groups: < 40 IU/L, 40–70 IU/L, and > 70 IU/L. The study examined annual trends in the frequency of new cases and ADA level distributions over time and identified discriminating factors between TPE and MPE in cases with ADA levels of 40–70 IU/L. Results: In total, 297 TPE and 369 MPE cases were included in this study. Over the study period, the frequency of TPE progressively declined, while that of MPE increased. In the most recent four-year period, new TPE and MPE cases with ADA levels of 40–70 IU/L occurred at comparable numbers. Multivariable analysis identified pleural fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels and the number of focal pleural nodules as independent predictors for MPE. Specifically, the presence of either CEA levels > 15.7 ng/mL or more than eight pleural nodules yielded the highest diagnostic accuracy with a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, and an area under the curve of 0.95. Conclusion The differential diagnosis between TPE and MPE with pleural ADA levels of 40–70 IU/L has become increasingly critical due to evolving epidemiological patterns and ADA distribution changes over time. Pleural fluid CEA levels and the characteristics of pleural nodules may offer valuable guidance in distinguishing between TPE and MPE within this diagnostic gray zone.

The applicability of the Phoenix criteria and Phoenix Sepsis Score in higher-resource pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) outside the United States requires further validation. A retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records of 1,304 PICU admissions under 18 years old with suspected infection between February 2017 and December 2023. The score was calculated using two methods: 24-hour assessment, based on worst sub-scores within 24 hours of admission, and prompt assessment, using values closest to admission within 6 hours before or after. Based on the 24-hour assessment, in-hospital mortality was 8.3% for sepsis and 10.3% for septic shock. The score demonstrated an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.55) for in-hospital mortality. Results were consistent across both assessment methods. The Phoenix criteria and the Phoenix Sepsis Score are reliable predictors of mortality outcomes. Further investigation in diverse clinical settings is warranted.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on admission rates and in-hospital mortality among patients with ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Methods: We constructed a dataset detailing the monthly hospitalizations and mortality rates of inpatients with stroke from January 2017 to December 2021. Employing an interrupted time series analysis, we explored the impact of COVID-19 on hospitalizations and 30-day in-hospital mortality among stroke patients. Results: The number of ischemic stroke admissions decreased by 18.5%, from 5335 to 4348, immediately following the COVID-19 outbreak (p<0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate for ischemic stroke increased slightly from 3.3% to 3.4% immediately after the outbreak, although it showed a decreasing trend over time. The number of hemorrhagic stroke admissions fell by 7.5%, from 2014 to 1864, immediately following the COVID-19 outbreak. The 30-day in-hospital mortality rate for hemorrhagic stroke initially decreased from 12.9% to 12.7%, but subsequently showed an increasing trend. Conclusions We confirmed that COVID-19 impacted both the admission and death rates of stroke patients. The admission rate for both ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes decreased, while in-hospital mortality increased. Specifically, in-hospital mortality from ischemic stroke rose initially after the outbreak before stabilizing. Additionally, our findings indicate variable effects based on sex, age, and socioeconomic status, suggesting that certain groups may be more susceptible. This underscores the need to identify and support vulnerable populations to mitigate adverse health outcomes.

Objective: Using a nationally representative cohort of medical claims data in Korea, this study aimed to analyze the association between the use of various anti-rheumatic agents and the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: This nested case-control study used the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment data of 35,133 patients newly diagnosed with RA between 2011 and 2020. Incident AMI patients were identified and matched at a 1:4 ratio with randomly selected controls. The usage of anti-rheumatic agents was measured from the date of RA diagnosis to the index date and stratified based on exposure time and duration. The risk of AMI associated with each anti-rheumatic agent was estimated using conditional logistic regression, adjusted for comorbidities and concomitant drug use. Results: Of the 35,133 patients with RA, 484 were diagnosed with AMI. In total, 484 AMI patients and 1,924 controls with newly diagnosed RA were included in the analysis. Current exposure and long-term exposure to glucocorticoids (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.301, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.741~3.041; aOR: 1.792, 95% CI: 1.378~2.330) and leflunomide (aOR: 1.525, 95% CI: 1.196~1.944; aOR: 1.740, 95% CI: 1.372~2.207) were associated with an increased risk of AMI. Conclusion The study demonstrates a significant association between the current and long-term use of glucocorticoids and leflunomide and an increased risk of AMI in patients with RA. These findings underscore the importance of careful consideration of cardiovascular risks when selecting anti-rheumatic agents for RA treatment.

Background/Aims: Studies on the clinical outcomes after detecting low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are insufficient. This study evaluated the clinical features, frequency, and risk factors for advanced neoplasia in patients with IBD after an LGD diagnosis. Methods: The medical records of 166 patients with IBD from six university hospitals in Korea from 2010 to 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. LGD was diagnosed in all patients during surveillance. The frequency and risk factors for advanced neoplasia were evaluated, and the clinical features of patients with and without advanced neoplasia were compared. Results: Advanced neoplasia developed in 12 patients (six with large LGD, three with tubulovillous adenoma, and three with high-grade dysplasia), and all cases developed from UC. Patients with advanced neoplasia had significantly higher Mayo scores, and colitis-associated dysplasia was more common than sporadic lesions (83.3% vs. 29.9%; p<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that colitis-associated LGD significantly increased the risk of developing advanced neoplasia (odds ratio [OR], 10.516; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.064–53.577). Among patients with colitis-associated lesions, a significant risk factor for advanced neoplasia was a prior history of LGD (OR, 9.429; 95% CI, 1.330–66.863). Conclusions Advanced neoplasia developed in 7.2% of patients with IBD and LGD. Most advanced neoplasms developed from colitis-associated lesions, and the risk was higher in patients with a history of LGD before index colonoscopy.

Background/Aims: Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) is associated with prognosis in patients with COVID-19. However, there is limited data on the correlation between the prognosis of COVID-19 and varying KL-6 levels at different time points. We investigated the optimal cutoff values of the initial and peak serum KL-6 levels to predict mortality and evaluated their correlation with mortality. Methods: This retrospective cohort study collected data on serially collected serum KL-6 levels in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between October 2020 and January 2022 at a single tertiary hospital in South Korea. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index were used to determine the cutoff points for the initial and peak KL-6 levels that best predicted 30-day mortality. The association between the initial and peak KL-6 values was assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Results: A total of 349 patients were included in this study. The mean initial and peak KL-6 levels were significantly higher in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. The initial and peak KL-6 values that best predicted 30-day mortality were 491.85 U/mL and 660.05 U/mL, respectively. An initial KL-6 level greater than 491.85 U/mL and a peak KL-6 level greater than 660.05 U/mL were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions The initial and peak levels of KL-6 were significantly associated with 30-day mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These findings suggest that serially monitoring blood KL-6 levels could be a valuable prognostic indicator for COVID-19.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.