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.

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.

Background/Aims: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATE+BEV) therapy has become the recommended first-line therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because of favorable treatment responses. However, there is a lack of data on sequential regimens after ATE+BEV treatment failure. We aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced HCC who received subsequent systemic therapy for disease progression after ATE+BEV. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study included patients who started second-line systemic treatment with sorafenib or lenvatinib after HCC progressed on ATE+BEV between August 2019 and December 2022. Treatment response was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1.). Clinical features of the two groups were balanced through propensity score (PS) matching. Results: This study enrolled 126 patients, 40 (31.7%) in the lenvatinib group, and 86 (68.3%) in the sorafenib group. The median age was 63 years, and males were predominant (88.1%). In PS-matched cohorts (36 patients in each group), the objective response rate was similar between the lenvatinib- and sorafenib-treated groups (5.6% vs. 8.3%; P=0.643), but the disease control rate was superior in the lenvatinib group (66.7% vs. 22.2%; P<0.001). Despite the superior progression- free survival (PFS) in the lenvatinib group (3.5 vs. 1.8 months, P=0.001), the overall survival (OS, 10.3 vs. 7.5 months, P=0.353) did not differ between the two PS-matched treatment groups. Conclusions In second-line therapy for unresectable HCC after ATE+BEV failure, lenvatinib showed better PFS and comparable OS to sorafenib in a real-world setting. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are needed to optimize second-line treatment.

Background: Prostate-specific antigen-based routine screening is not recommended for the general population due to conflicting results with mortality reduction. We aimed to develop a web-based decision aid (DA) for informed decision making for prostate cancer screening. Methods: Using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) development process model, we developed our DA based on patient and clinician interviews and multidisciplinary expert discussions. The prototype consisted of predicting individual prostate cancer risk and informed decision-making, including knowledge, risk and benefit, cost, personal value, and decision making. We conducted a pilot study on 101 healthy men, evaluating the effectiveness of DA by measuring knowledge, attitude, and intention to screen before and after using the DA, as well as decisional conflict and usefulness after using the DA. Results: Of the 101 participants (median age 60 [50–69] years), 84% had not undergone screening for prostate cancer in the past two years. After using the DA, knowledge on prostate cancer screening increased (mean score [of 10] before versus after: 6.85 ± 1.03 versus 7.57 ± 1.25; P < 0.001), and intention to not screen increased from 27.7% to 51.5% (P < 0.001), but attitude toward screening did not change (P = 0.564). After use of the DA, 79 participants reported no decisional conflict, and the usefulness score was high (mean score [of 100] 77.35 ± 7.69), with 85% of participants reporting that the DA helped with decision making. Conclusion Our web-based DA yielded increased knowledge, decreased screening intention, and high perceived usefulness. These findings indicate potential clinical relevance, especially among younger individuals.

Background: Cholecystitis is an important risk factor for gallbladder cancer, but the bile microbiome and its association with gallbladder disease has not been investigated fully.We aimed to analyze the bile microbiome in normal conditions, chronic cholecystitis, and gallbladder cancer, and to identify candidate bacteria that play an important role in gallbladder carcinogenesis. Methods: We performed metagenome sequencing on bile samples of 10 healthy individuals, 10 patients with chronic cholecystitis, and 5 patients with gallbladder cancer, and compared the clinical, radiological, and pathological characteristics of the participants. Results: No significant bacterial signal was identified in the normal bile. The predominant dysbiotic bacteria in both chronic cholecystitis and gallbladder cancer were those belonging to the Enterobacteriaceae family. Klebsiella increased significantly in the order of normal, chronic cholecystitis, and gallbladder cancer. Patients with chronic cholecystitis and dysbiotic microbiome patterns had larger gallstones and showed marked epithelial atypia, which are considered as precancerous conditions. Conclusion We investigated the bile microbiome in normal, chronic cholecystitis, and gallbladder cancer. We suggest possible roles of Enterobacteriaceae, including Klebsiella, in gallbladder carcinogenesis. Our findings reveal a possible link between a dysbiotic bile microbiome and the development of chronic calculous cholecystitis and gallbladder cancer.