Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

Clinical guidelines typically endorse conventional therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) as the mainstay of ulcerative colitis management. However, the degree of adoption and application of guideline recommendations by physicians within Asia remains unclear. This study aims to understand the prescribing patterns of 5-ASA and implementation of current guideline recommendations across Asian clinical practice. A physician survey was conducted among inflammatory bowel disease specialists in 8 Asian territories to understand practices and preferences in ulcerative colitis management, focusing on the use of 5-ASA and concordance with guideline recommendations. Survey findings were validated by country experts in diverse healthcare settings. Subgroup analyses stratified data by income levels and treatment reimbursement status. Ninety-eight valid responses were received from inflammatory bowel disease specialists or gastroenterologists among 8 economic entities. Significant differences were found in clinical practices and treatment preferences for ulcerative colitis management among different income-level and government-subsidy groups. Survey results are summarized in 8 findings that illustrate trends in 5-ASA use and guideline implementation across Asian territories. This study emphasizes socioeconomic factors that impact the adoption of guideline recommendations in real-world practice. Our findings indicate an eclectic approach to guideline implementation across Asia, based on resource availability and feasibility of treatment goals.

The lack of clear definition and classification for “moderate ulcerative colitis (UC)” creates ambiguity regarding the suitability of step-up versus top-down treatment approaches. In this paper, experts address crucial gaps in assessing and managing moderate UC. The Asia-Pacific, Middle East, and Africa Inflammatory Bowel Disease Coalition comprised 24 experts who convened to share, discuss and vote electronically on management recommendations for moderate UC. Experts emphasized that the goal of treating UC is to attain clinical, biomarker, and endoscopic remission using cost-effective strategies such as 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs), well-tolerated therapy that can be optimized to improve outcomes. Experts agreed that 5-ASA therapy could be optimized by maximizing dosage (4 g/day for induction of remission), combining oral and topical administration, extending treatment duration beyond 8 weeks, and enhancing patient adherence through personalized counselling and reduced pill burden. Treatment escalation should ideally be reserved for patients with predictors of aggressive disease or those who do not respond to 5-ASA optimization. Premature treatment escalation to advanced therapies (including biologics and oral small molecules) may have long-term health and financial consequences. This paper provides consensus-based expert recommendations and a treatment algorithm, based on current evidence and practices, to assist decision-making in real-world settings.

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of crisaborole ointment 2% versus pimecrolimus cream 1% in the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in children aged 2 years or older.Methods:A multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial was conducted. A total of 120 pediatric patients aged 2 - 17 years with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis were enrolled from departments of dermatology of 8 hospitals in China between March 2022 and February 2023. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1∶1 ratio to the crisaborole group and the pimecrolimus group, and received the treatment with crisaborole ointment 2% and pimecrolimus cream 1% respectively, twice a day for 4 weeks. Visits were scheduled at baseline/on day 1, as well as on days 8, 15, and 29. The primary efficacy outcome was the percentage of patients achieving the Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success (defined as clear [0] or almost clear [1] on the ISGA scale, combined with ≥ 2‐grade improvement from baseline) on day 29. The secondary efficacy outcomes included changes in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) total scores from baseline to day 29, percentages of patients achieving ISGA improvement (defined as clear [0] or almost clear [1] on the ISGA scale), as well as changes in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) /Infants' Dermatology Life Quality Index (IDLQI) /Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) scores, and in the Dermatitis Family Impact (DFI) scores. Drug safety was evaluated according to the incidence of adverse events. Categorical data were compared using the chi-square test. Since measurement data did not follow a normal distribution, the rank sum test was used for comparisons of measurement data between groups.Results:A total of 106 children with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis were included in the per-protocol analysis set, with 52 in the crisaborole group (26 males and 26 females) and 54 in the pimecrolimus group (27 males and 27 females). There were no significant differences in age, disease duration, ISGA and EASI scores at baseline between the two groups (all P > 0.05). On day 29, 22 patients (42.31%) in the crisaborole group and 25 (46.30%) in the pimecrolimus group achieved ISGA success, with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 0.17, P = 0.68) ; 35 patients (67.31%) in the crisaborole group and 45 (83.33%) in the pimecrolimus group achieved ISGA improvement, also with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 3.68, P = 0.06) ; additionally, there were no significant differences in the EASI, pruritus NRS, DLQI/IDLQI/CDLQI, or DFI scores between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Adverse reactions to the two topical agents were mainly local reactions such as mild to moderate pain, itching, or worsening of itching, and no obvious systemic adverse reactions occurred. The incidence of drug-related adverse reactions was 46.15% (24 cases) in the crisaborole group and 37.04% (20 cases) in the pimecrolimus group, with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 0.91, P = 0.34) . Conclusion:The efficacy of crisaborole ointment 2% was comparable to that of pimecrolimus cream 1% in the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in children aged ≥ 2 years, and it yielded early and rapid improvement in the quality of life of patients and their families, with good safety and tolerability profiles.

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of crisaborole ointment 2% versus pimecrolimus cream 1% in the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in children aged 2 years or older.Methods:A multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trial was conducted. A total of 120 pediatric patients aged 2 - 17 years with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis were enrolled from departments of dermatology of 8 hospitals in China between March 2022 and February 2023. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1∶1 ratio to the crisaborole group and the pimecrolimus group, and received the treatment with crisaborole ointment 2% and pimecrolimus cream 1% respectively, twice a day for 4 weeks. Visits were scheduled at baseline/on day 1, as well as on days 8, 15, and 29. The primary efficacy outcome was the percentage of patients achieving the Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success (defined as clear [0] or almost clear [1] on the ISGA scale, combined with ≥ 2‐grade improvement from baseline) on day 29. The secondary efficacy outcomes included changes in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) total scores from baseline to day 29, percentages of patients achieving ISGA improvement (defined as clear [0] or almost clear [1] on the ISGA scale), as well as changes in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) /Infants' Dermatology Life Quality Index (IDLQI) /Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) scores, and in the Dermatitis Family Impact (DFI) scores. Drug safety was evaluated according to the incidence of adverse events. Categorical data were compared using the chi-square test. Since measurement data did not follow a normal distribution, the rank sum test was used for comparisons of measurement data between groups.Results:A total of 106 children with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis were included in the per-protocol analysis set, with 52 in the crisaborole group (26 males and 26 females) and 54 in the pimecrolimus group (27 males and 27 females). There were no significant differences in age, disease duration, ISGA and EASI scores at baseline between the two groups (all P > 0.05). On day 29, 22 patients (42.31%) in the crisaborole group and 25 (46.30%) in the pimecrolimus group achieved ISGA success, with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 0.17, P = 0.68) ; 35 patients (67.31%) in the crisaborole group and 45 (83.33%) in the pimecrolimus group achieved ISGA improvement, also with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 3.68, P = 0.06) ; additionally, there were no significant differences in the EASI, pruritus NRS, DLQI/IDLQI/CDLQI, or DFI scores between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Adverse reactions to the two topical agents were mainly local reactions such as mild to moderate pain, itching, or worsening of itching, and no obvious systemic adverse reactions occurred. The incidence of drug-related adverse reactions was 46.15% (24 cases) in the crisaborole group and 37.04% (20 cases) in the pimecrolimus group, with no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2 = 0.91, P = 0.34) . Conclusion:The efficacy of crisaborole ointment 2% was comparable to that of pimecrolimus cream 1% in the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in children aged ≥ 2 years, and it yielded early and rapid improvement in the quality of life of patients and their families, with good safety and tolerability profiles.

Objective: This study compared the outcomes of laparotomic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MISRH) in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Methods: The clinical data of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent LRH or MISRH (laparoscopic/robotic) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, from 2002 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The surgical safety (operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of postoperative stay, and perioperative complications), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence pattern were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a 3:1 ratio was performed to balance prognostic variables. Results: Of the 760 patients (entire cohort), 614 underwent LRH and 146 underwent MISRH.After PSM, 394 and 140 patients were included in the LRH and MISRH groups, respectively.The 5-year OS rate was significantly lower in the MISRH group than in the LRH group (85.6% vs. 93.2%, p=0.043), and the 5-year DFS rate (p=0.21) did not differ significantly. After PSM, the 5-year OS rates did not differ significantly between the MISRH and LRH groups (87.1% vs. 92.1%, p=0.393). The MISRH group had a significantly shorter operation time (p<0.001), lower intraoperative blood loss (p<0.001), lower blood transfusion rate (p<0.001), and shorter postoperative stay (p<0.001) but a significantly higher rate of intraoperative bladder injury (p<0.001) than the LRH group. Conclusion After PSM, MISRH is associated with nonsignificantly lower OS but a significantly higher risk of intraoperative urological complications than LRH.

Objective: This study compared the outcomes of laparotomic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (MISRH) in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Methods: The clinical data of patients with early-stage cervical cancer who underwent LRH or MISRH (laparoscopic/robotic) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou Branch, from 2002 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The surgical safety (operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of postoperative stay, and perioperative complications), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence pattern were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a 3:1 ratio was performed to balance prognostic variables. Results: Of the 760 patients (entire cohort), 614 underwent LRH and 146 underwent MISRH.After PSM, 394 and 140 patients were included in the LRH and MISRH groups, respectively.The 5-year OS rate was significantly lower in the MISRH group than in the LRH group (85.6% vs. 93.2%, p=0.043), and the 5-year DFS rate (p=0.21) did not differ significantly. After PSM, the 5-year OS rates did not differ significantly between the MISRH and LRH groups (87.1% vs. 92.1%, p=0.393). The MISRH group had a significantly shorter operation time (p<0.001), lower intraoperative blood loss (p<0.001), lower blood transfusion rate (p<0.001), and shorter postoperative stay (p<0.001) but a significantly higher rate of intraoperative bladder injury (p<0.001) than the LRH group. Conclusion After PSM, MISRH is associated with nonsignificantly lower OS but a significantly higher risk of intraoperative urological complications than LRH.