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.

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: Cutaneous manifestations are frequently observed in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and affect the quality of life (QoL) of patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Even patients undergoing HD who frequently visit hospitals do not receive active dermatological care. The aims of this study were to assess the cutaneous manifestations of patients undergoing HD and investigate changes in their QoL before and after active treatment by dermatologists. Methods: A 12-week prospective study was conducted in two HD centers. Patients in one center received dermatological intervention, while patients in the other center received conservative management by a nephrologist. Patients scored their QoL using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Skindex-29 at the start of the study and 12 weeks later. Two matched groups were formed using propensity score matching.Simple and multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify associations between dermatological treatment and the improvement in QoL. Results: In total, 120 patients were included, of whom 65 and 55 were in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Approximately 93.8% of the patients had dermatological manifestations, with pallor and xerosis being the most common. Improvement in QoL, as assessed using the DLQI, was confirmed after 12 weeks in the overall population. However, active intervention by a dermatologist did not significantly improve QoL. Conclusion Patients treated with dermatological intervention by a dermatologist did not achieve greater improvements in QoL than control patients. Therefore, careful assessment of skin issues in patients with ESKD should be undertaken by nephrologists, and the best possible treatment should be administered.

Background: Cutaneous manifestations are frequently observed in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and affect the quality of life (QoL) of patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Even patients undergoing HD who frequently visit hospitals do not receive active dermatological care. The aims of this study were to assess the cutaneous manifestations of patients undergoing HD and investigate changes in their QoL before and after active treatment by dermatologists. Methods: A 12-week prospective study was conducted in two HD centers. Patients in one center received dermatological intervention, while patients in the other center received conservative management by a nephrologist. Patients scored their QoL using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Skindex-29 at the start of the study and 12 weeks later. Two matched groups were formed using propensity score matching.Simple and multiple linear regression analyses were used to identify associations between dermatological treatment and the improvement in QoL. Results: In total, 120 patients were included, of whom 65 and 55 were in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Approximately 93.8% of the patients had dermatological manifestations, with pallor and xerosis being the most common. Improvement in QoL, as assessed using the DLQI, was confirmed after 12 weeks in the overall population. However, active intervention by a dermatologist did not significantly improve QoL. Conclusion Patients treated with dermatological intervention by a dermatologist did not achieve greater improvements in QoL than control patients. Therefore, careful assessment of skin issues in patients with ESKD should be undertaken by nephrologists, and the best possible treatment should be administered.

Purpose: The rate of interval colorectal cancer (iCRC) is now accepted as a key performance indicator of organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. We aimed to examine the association between endoscopist volumes and the rate of iCRC among individuals with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) within a nationwide population-based CRC screening program. Materials and Methods: Individuals aged ≥ 50 years who underwent colonoscopy after a positive FIT from January 1, 2019 until December 31, 2020 in the Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) were enrolled. We converted the data into per-endoscopist screening results, calculated the iCRC rates per endoscopist, and compared them to the previous year’s annual volume that was divided into five groups (V1, 1-9; V2, 10-29; V3, 30-59; V4, 60-119; V5, ≥ 120). Results: A total of 10,412 endoscopists performed 216,907 colonoscopies. Overall, the average rate of iCRC per endoscopist was 8.46 per 1,000 examinations. Compared with the group with the highest volume (V5 group), the rate of iCRC was 2.21 times higher in the V1 group. Similar trends were observed in the other groups (V2: relative risks [RR], 2.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 2.94; V3: RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.13; V4: RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.67). Conclusion The findings emphasize that endoscopists with lower procedure volumes have higher risks of interval cancer being missed or undetected. To maximize the preventative impact of colonoscopy for CRC, this issue should be addressed by monitoring endoscopist volumes and variations in performances.