Background/Aims: The International Anorectal Physiology Working Group (IAPWG) has proposed a standardized protocol and the London classification to enhance the consistency and diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry (ARM). However, real-world adoption in Asian countries has not been systematically assessed. This study aims to evaluate current ARM practices and adherence to the IAPWG protocol across Asian centers. Methods: A cross-sectional, 50-item web-based survey was distributed to gastroenterologists and motility specialists practicing in Asian countries. Results: Thirty-one centers from 8 countries responded (20 in Korea, 3 in Japan, 2 in Taiwan, 1 in China, and 7 in other countries). High-resolution ARM was used in 80.6% of centers, primarily with solid-state catheters. While all centers performed rest and short squeeze maneuvers, only 58.1% conducted all maneuvers recommended by the IAPWG protocol.Considerable variation was observed in test methodology and interpretation, including definitions of resting pressure, squeeze duration, push maneuver repetition, and rectal balloon volume for rectoanal inhibitory reflex. For balloon expulsion and rectal sensory testing, centers differed in patient positioning, balloon type, inflation methods, and threshold definitions. Only 38.7% of centers reported having institutional normative values for test interpretation, and 64.5% applied the London classification. Conclusions Across Asian centers, ARM practice shows marked regional variation and incomplete implementation of the IAPWG standardized protocol and London classification, highlighting persistent gaps in standardization. Strengthening procedural guidance, regionally appropriate normative data, and interpretation criteria through coordinated education and international collaboration is needed to support more consistent and clinically meaningful use of ARM in routine practice.

Purpose: This 6-year post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted in South Korea to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of eribulin in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. Materials and Methods: During the study period (17 August 2012 to 16 August 2018), case-report files (CRFs) of patients receiving eribulin were collected. The main study endpoint was to assess the safety of eribulin. Evaluation of the effectiveness of eribulin was an exploratory endpoint. Patients were followed for 1 year after eribulin initiation. Results: CRFs were collected from 64 investigators at 64 sites for 1,079 patients. The safety analysis set (SAS) included 1,001 eribulin recipients; effectiveness was assessed in 244 patients. In the SAS, patients were predominantly female (99.6%), with a median age of 53.0 years, and diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer (92.0%). Eribulin was administered as a median 4th line chemotherapy. A total of 2,124 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 661 patients (66.0%). Neutropenia was the most common TEAE (32.5% of patients), occurring at a median of 9-11 days from initial eribulin administration. Overall response and disease control rates were 31.7% and 95.6%, respectively, and the median duration of eribulin use (time to treatment failure) was 3.0 months. Conclusion This large real-world PMS analysis in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer demonstrated the effectiveness of eribulin and found no new safety concerns relative to safety information from prior clinical and real-world studies, and approvals in South Korea and other countries.

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.

Objective: We intended to investigate the relationships between visual sensory impairment (VSI) or auditory sensory impairment (ASI) and brain pathological changes associated with cognitive decline in older adults. Methods: We primarily tried to examine whether each sensory impairment is related to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology, specifically beta-amyloid (Aβ) deposition, through both cross-sectional and longitudinal approaches in cognitively unimpaired older adults. Self-report questionnaires on vision and hearing status were administered at the baseline.Neuroimaging scans including brain [ 11 C] Pittsburgh Compound B PET and MRI, as well as clinical assessments, were performed at baseline and 2-year follow-up. Results: Cross-sectional analyses showed that the VSI-positive group had significantly higher Aβ deposition than the VSI-negative group, whereas there was no significant association between ASI positivity and Aβ deposition. Longitudinal analyses revealed that VSI positivity at baseline was significantly associated with increased Aβ deposition over 2 years (β = 0.153, p = 0.025), although ASI positivity was not (β = 0.045, p = 0.518). VSI positivity at baseline was also significantly associated with greater atrophic changes in AD-related brain regions over the 2-year follow-up period (β = −0.207, p = 0.005), whereas ASI positivity was not (β = 0.024, p = 0.753). Neither VSI nor ASI positivity was related to cerebrovascular injury, as measured based on the white matter hyperintensity volume. Conclusion The findings suggest that VSI is probably related to AD-specific pathological changes, which possibly mediate the reported relationship between VSI and cognitive decline. In contrast, ASI appears not associated with AD pathologies but may contribute to cognitive decline via other mechanisms.