Background: Rapid pathogen identification and antibiotic-susceptibility tests (ASTs) are important for treating bloodstream infections. We compared the performance of the QMAC-dRAST and BD Phoenix M50 direct AST (dPhoenix) systems using bacterial pellets prepared from positive blood culture broth and evaluated their impact on treatment modification. Methods: Direct AST results for 106 Enterobacterales isolates were retrospectively reviewed. Conventional broth microdilution was used to calculate categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME), major error (ME), and minor error (mE). For isolates showing high VMEs in both methods, supplementary tests were performed. Clinical impact was evaluated by calculating the time required to obtain AST results (time-to-result) and observing changes in antibiotics prescribed after performing ASTs. Results: Both systems showed acceptable overall CA, VME, ME, and mE values (QMACdRAST: 93.6%, 1.6%, 0.9%, and 5.3%, respectively; dPhoenix: 93.1%, 0.9%, 0.6%, and 6.2%, respectively). Piperacillin–tazobactam showed high VMEs with QMAC-dRAST (4/20, 20.0%) and dPhoenix (3/20, 15.0%). Colony AST on 13 isolates revealed that QMACdRAST testing yielded lower minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for piperacillin–tazobactam with three isolates, whereas dPhoenix testing yielded higher MICs with two isolates and lower MICs with two isolates. The average time-to-result was 20.8 hr and 30.1 hr for QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix, respectively (P < 0.001). After AST, the number of optimal treatments increased from 43 (46.7%) to 72 (78.3%) (P < 0.001). Conclusions The QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix systems provided reliable AST results with a short time-to-result. However, we recommend performing complementary tests, such as the disk diffusion test, for piperacillin–tazobactam.

Objective: This study aims to compare the incidence of active tuberculosis (TB) among Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or tofacitinib. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance database, we conducted a nationwide, retrospective cohort study of RA patients who started TNFi or tofacitinib therapy between 2015 and 2018. We calculated the incidence rates of active TB based on the treatment type and results from latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening tests. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was employed to evaluate the risk of active TB in RA patients beginning TNFi or tofacitinib treatment. Results: Among 3,382 RA patients (596 on tofacitinib and 2,786 on TNFi), LTBI screening was predominantly conducted using the IGRA (interferon-gamma release assays) test. Of these patients, 624 (18.5%) with a positive LTBI test received prophylactic treatment. No cases of active TB occurred in tofacitinib users, while 32 cases were observed in TNFi users. The adjusted hazard ratio for active TB in LTBI-positive patients was 5.47 (95% confidence interval 2.74 to 10.92) compared to LTBI-negative patients.In subgroup analyses, TB incidence was significantly higher among individuals aged over 65 years. Conclusion Despite LTBI treatment, active TB remains prevalent among RA patients on TNFi therapy and in those with positive LTBI tests.

Objective: Evidence remains limited regarding whether Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) or modified RECIST (mRECIST) more reliably assesses treatment response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo/Bev). This study aimed to evaluate response patterns based on RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST, analyze inter-reader agreement, and assess their prognostic value for overall survival (OS) in patients with HCC receiving first-line Atezo/Bev. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included patients with HCC treated with first-line Atezo/Bev between June 2020 and December 2022 at a tertiary center. Patients with at least one hypervascular hepatic target lesion were eligible. Two radiologists independently assessed treatment responses using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated using Cohen’s kappa coefficient. Time-dependent Cox regression analysis was performed, with radiologic response and progression treated as time-varying covariates. Prognostic discrimination was evaluated using Harrell’s concordance index (C-index). Results: A total of 207 patients were included (171 men; median age, 63 years; median follow-up, 10.7 months [range, 0.8– 46.4 months]; median OS, 10.7 months [95% confidence interval, 9.2–12.8 months]). mRECIST identified more responders than RECIST 1.1 (54.6% vs. 16.9%). RECIST 1.1 demonstrated excellent inter-reader agreement, whereas mRECIST showed substantial agreement (weighted kappa, 0.89 vs. 0.79). A significantly higher rate of dissociated responses was observed with mRECIST than with RECIST 1.1 (14.0% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.001). Both RECIST 1.1- and mRECIST-based responses and progression were independently associated with OS. Models incorporating RECIST 1.1 demonstrated slightly higher C-index values than those incorporating mRECIST (RECIST 1.1: 0.68 for response and 0.75 for progression; mRECIST: 0.65 and 0.70, respectively). Conclusion RECIST 1.1 is more reproducible and prognostically valuable for guiding treatment decisions in patients with HCC receiving first-line Atezo/Bev. However, this does not invalidate the use of mRECIST as a biological tumor response marker.

Purpose: Older cancer patients face unique challenges due to age-related physiological changes, increasing their vulnerability to treatment-related toxicities. Geriatric assessment (GA) is a validated tool for optimizing care, yet there is no consensus on integrating geriatric interventions into oncology. This study evaluates the feasibility of a tailored onco-geriatric intervention model incorporating the KG-7 screening tool. Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 30 patients aged ≥ 70 years with solid tumors undergoing adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy. Patients scoring ≤ 5 of KG-7 were eligible. Tailored interventions incorporating KG-7 included polypharmacy, functional status, mobility, nutrition, cognition, emotional well-being, insomnia, social support, and medical problem. KG-7, GA, and quality of life (QoL) were followed at 12 weeks. Results: Participants (median age, 79.5 years) had colon (43.3%), pancreatic (23.3%), or gastric cancer (23.3%). At baseline, most patients showed independent activities of daily living (100%)/instrumental activities of daily living (90%). However, 93.3% had abnormal GA. Particularly, 86.7% were either malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. The most frequently identified intervention needs included polypharmacy (70.0%), nutritional support (60.0%), and emotional well-being (50.0%) with high adherence (100.0%, 88.9%, and 46.7%, respectively). At 12 weeks, KG-7 scores improved in 43.8% of patients, and 69.2% of GA domains were improved. QoL analysis revealed modest improvement in Global Health Status (mean difference, 6.3; p=0.176). One-year survival rates were 92.3% and 79.4% for adjuvant and palliative groups, respectively. Conclusion The onco-geriatric intervention model incorporating KG-7 demonstrated high feasibility and potential to enhance clinical outcomes. Future studies should validate this approach in randomized trials to optimize care for older cancer patients.

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.

Pharmacogenomic variations may significantly influence responses to commonly prescribed stroke medications. Despite accumulating evidence, genetic testing has not yet been widely integrated into stroke care. This review summarizes current evidence and provides practical guidance for clinical implementation. Pharmacogenomic studies and clinical guidelines related to antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants, and statins were reviewed, with particular emphasis on East Asian populations. Substantial evidence supports genotype-guided use of clopidogrel (CYP2C19), warfarin (CYP2C9, VKORC1, CYP4F2), and statins (SLCO1B1, ABCG2). For aspirin, PTGS1/2 and PEAR1 variants have been investigated; however, current data remain insufficient for clinical application. Regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), candidate genes such as ABCB1 and CES1 demonstrate pharmacokinetic associations, though robust clinical outcome data are lacking. Distinct allele frequencies in East Asians—such as higher prevalence of CYP2C19 and ABCG2 variants—underscore the need for population-specific strategies. Beyond single-gene approaches, polygenic risk scores, pharmacogenomic panels, and integration with multi-omics data and artificial intelligence represent promising directions for personalized therapy. Pharmacogenomic testing can enhance stroke pharmacotherapy, particularly in populations with high frequencies of actionable variants. Broader implementation requires rapid testing platforms, clinician education, tailored clinical guidelines, and real-world validation of aspirin, DOACs, and multi-gene approaches. Future research should expand population-specific studies and integrate pharmacogenomics within the broader framework of precision medicine to ensure equitable clinical benefit.

Background: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) significantly increases the risk of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) due to cardiac dyssynchrony. Although artificial intelligence–enabled electrocardiography (AI-ECG) mod‑ els show promise in detecting LVSD, their performance in LBBB patients remains underexplored. We hypothesized that an AI-ECG model clinically validated for detecting LVSD would accurately detect LVSD and predict future clinical outcomes in LBBB patients. Methods: In this retrospective multicenter study, 5,689 expert-validated LBBB ECGs collected from 2,813 patients between 2016 and 2024 were analyzed using a previously developed and validated AI-ECG model. LVSD was defined as an ejection fraction of ≤ 40%. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating char‑ acteristic curve (AUROC), the area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), sensitivity, and specificity. Patients were stratified into high- and low-risk groups based on a threshold that achieved 90% sensitivity. A Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to compare clinical outcomes. Results: Among the 2,813 LBBB patients (mean age, 70.7 years; male sex, 43.7%), hypertension and a history of heart failure were common. The AiTiALVSD model showed strong diagnostic performance for LVSD (AUROC, 0.930 [95% CI, 0.924–0.937]; AUPRC, 0.913 [95% CI, 0.902–0.923]; sensitivity, 0.979; specificity, 0.473). During the mean follow-up of 4.1 years, high-risk patients had significantly higher hazards than low-risk patients for all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.87; 95% CI, 1.53–2.28), implantable cardioverter defibrillator/cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation (adjusted HR, 15.2; 95% CI, 7.51–30.77), and cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.96–1.28). Conclusions AiTiALVSD effectively detects LVSD and stratifies long-term cardiovascular risk in LBBB patients, support‑ ing its clinical utility for early detection and patient management.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.