Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: We aimed to comprehensively analyze the immune cell and stromal components of tumor microenvironment at the single-cell level and identify tumor heterogeneity among the major top-derived oncogene mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Materials and Methods: The scRNA-seq dataset utilized in this study comprised 64369 primary tumor tissue cells from 21 NSCLC patients, focusing on mutations in EGFR, ALK, BRAF, KRAS, TP53, and the wild-type. Results: Tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) analysis revealed differential immune responses across NSCLC mutation subtypes. TIM analysis revealed different immune responses across the mutation subtypes. Two mutation clusters emerged: KRAS, TP53, and EGFR+TP53 mutations (MC1); and EGFR, BRAF, and ALK mutations (MC2). MC1 showed higher tertiary lymphoid structures signature scores and enriched populations of C2-T-IL7R, C3-T/NK-CXCL4, C9-T/NK-NKG, and C1-B-MS4A1 clusters than cluster 2. Conversely, MC2 cells exhibited higher expression levels of TNF, IL1B, and chemokines linked to alternative immune pathways. Remarkably, co-occurring EGFR and TP53 mutations were grouped as MC1. EGFR+TP53 mutations showed upregulation of peptide synthesis and higher synthetic processes, as well as differences in myeloid and T/NK cells compared to EGFR mutations. In T/NK cells, EGFR+TP53 mutations showed a higher expression of features related to cell activity and differentiation, whereas EGFR mutations showed the opposite. Conclusion Our research indicates a close association between mutation types and tumor microenvironment in NSCLC, offering insights into personalized approaches for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Purpose: We aimed to comprehensively analyze the immune cell and stromal components of tumor microenvironment at the single-cell level and identify tumor heterogeneity among the major top-derived oncogene mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Materials and Methods: The scRNA-seq dataset utilized in this study comprised 64369 primary tumor tissue cells from 21 NSCLC patients, focusing on mutations in EGFR, ALK, BRAF, KRAS, TP53, and the wild-type. Results: Tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) analysis revealed differential immune responses across NSCLC mutation subtypes. TIM analysis revealed different immune responses across the mutation subtypes. Two mutation clusters emerged: KRAS, TP53, and EGFR+TP53 mutations (MC1); and EGFR, BRAF, and ALK mutations (MC2). MC1 showed higher tertiary lymphoid structures signature scores and enriched populations of C2-T-IL7R, C3-T/NK-CXCL4, C9-T/NK-NKG, and C1-B-MS4A1 clusters than cluster 2. Conversely, MC2 cells exhibited higher expression levels of TNF, IL1B, and chemokines linked to alternative immune pathways. Remarkably, co-occurring EGFR and TP53 mutations were grouped as MC1. EGFR+TP53 mutations showed upregulation of peptide synthesis and higher synthetic processes, as well as differences in myeloid and T/NK cells compared to EGFR mutations. In T/NK cells, EGFR+TP53 mutations showed a higher expression of features related to cell activity and differentiation, whereas EGFR mutations showed the opposite. Conclusion Our research indicates a close association between mutation types and tumor microenvironment in NSCLC, offering insights into personalized approaches for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Purpose: We aimed to comprehensively analyze the immune cell and stromal components of tumor microenvironment at the single-cell level and identify tumor heterogeneity among the major top-derived oncogene mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Materials and Methods: The scRNA-seq dataset utilized in this study comprised 64369 primary tumor tissue cells from 21 NSCLC patients, focusing on mutations in EGFR, ALK, BRAF, KRAS, TP53, and the wild-type. Results: Tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) analysis revealed differential immune responses across NSCLC mutation subtypes. TIM analysis revealed different immune responses across the mutation subtypes. Two mutation clusters emerged: KRAS, TP53, and EGFR+TP53 mutations (MC1); and EGFR, BRAF, and ALK mutations (MC2). MC1 showed higher tertiary lymphoid structures signature scores and enriched populations of C2-T-IL7R, C3-T/NK-CXCL4, C9-T/NK-NKG, and C1-B-MS4A1 clusters than cluster 2. Conversely, MC2 cells exhibited higher expression levels of TNF, IL1B, and chemokines linked to alternative immune pathways. Remarkably, co-occurring EGFR and TP53 mutations were grouped as MC1. EGFR+TP53 mutations showed upregulation of peptide synthesis and higher synthetic processes, as well as differences in myeloid and T/NK cells compared to EGFR mutations. In T/NK cells, EGFR+TP53 mutations showed a higher expression of features related to cell activity and differentiation, whereas EGFR mutations showed the opposite. Conclusion Our research indicates a close association between mutation types and tumor microenvironment in NSCLC, offering insights into personalized approaches for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Purpose: We aimed to comprehensively analyze the immune cell and stromal components of tumor microenvironment at the single-cell level and identify tumor heterogeneity among the major top-derived oncogene mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Materials and Methods: The scRNA-seq dataset utilized in this study comprised 64369 primary tumor tissue cells from 21 NSCLC patients, focusing on mutations in EGFR, ALK, BRAF, KRAS, TP53, and the wild-type. Results: Tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) analysis revealed differential immune responses across NSCLC mutation subtypes. TIM analysis revealed different immune responses across the mutation subtypes. Two mutation clusters emerged: KRAS, TP53, and EGFR+TP53 mutations (MC1); and EGFR, BRAF, and ALK mutations (MC2). MC1 showed higher tertiary lymphoid structures signature scores and enriched populations of C2-T-IL7R, C3-T/NK-CXCL4, C9-T/NK-NKG, and C1-B-MS4A1 clusters than cluster 2. Conversely, MC2 cells exhibited higher expression levels of TNF, IL1B, and chemokines linked to alternative immune pathways. Remarkably, co-occurring EGFR and TP53 mutations were grouped as MC1. EGFR+TP53 mutations showed upregulation of peptide synthesis and higher synthetic processes, as well as differences in myeloid and T/NK cells compared to EGFR mutations. In T/NK cells, EGFR+TP53 mutations showed a higher expression of features related to cell activity and differentiation, whereas EGFR mutations showed the opposite. Conclusion Our research indicates a close association between mutation types and tumor microenvironment in NSCLC, offering insights into personalized approaches for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Purpose: We aimed to comprehensively analyze the immune cell and stromal components of tumor microenvironment at the single-cell level and identify tumor heterogeneity among the major top-derived oncogene mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Materials and Methods: The scRNA-seq dataset utilized in this study comprised 64369 primary tumor tissue cells from 21 NSCLC patients, focusing on mutations in EGFR, ALK, BRAF, KRAS, TP53, and the wild-type. Results: Tumor immune microenvironment (TIM) analysis revealed differential immune responses across NSCLC mutation subtypes. TIM analysis revealed different immune responses across the mutation subtypes. Two mutation clusters emerged: KRAS, TP53, and EGFR+TP53 mutations (MC1); and EGFR, BRAF, and ALK mutations (MC2). MC1 showed higher tertiary lymphoid structures signature scores and enriched populations of C2-T-IL7R, C3-T/NK-CXCL4, C9-T/NK-NKG, and C1-B-MS4A1 clusters than cluster 2. Conversely, MC2 cells exhibited higher expression levels of TNF, IL1B, and chemokines linked to alternative immune pathways. Remarkably, co-occurring EGFR and TP53 mutations were grouped as MC1. EGFR+TP53 mutations showed upregulation of peptide synthesis and higher synthetic processes, as well as differences in myeloid and T/NK cells compared to EGFR mutations. In T/NK cells, EGFR+TP53 mutations showed a higher expression of features related to cell activity and differentiation, whereas EGFR mutations showed the opposite. Conclusion Our research indicates a close association between mutation types and tumor microenvironment in NSCLC, offering insights into personalized approaches for cancer diagnosis and treatment.