Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a minimally invasive treatment modality used as an alternative to surgery in patients with benign thyroid nodules, recurrent thyroid cancers (RTCs), and primary thyroid microcarcinomas. The Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology (KSThR) initially developed recommendations for the optimal use of RFA for thyroid tumors in 2009 and revised them in 2012 and 2017. As new meaningful evidence has accumulated since 2017 and in response to a growing global interest in the use of RFA for treating malignant thyroid lesions, the task force committee members of the KSThR decided to update the guidelines on the use of RFA for the management of RTCs based on a comprehensive analysis of current literature and expert consensus.

Background: and Purpose The pain lateralization in cluster headache (CH) may be related to the asymmetry in the functions of the brain hemispheres. The right-sided dominance of pain in CH has been found inconsistently across studies, and so we aimed to characterize this and identify the factors influencing pain lateralization during current and previous bouts. Methods: This study enrolled 227 patients from the Korean Cluster Headache Registry between October 2018 and December 2020. We evaluated the side of pain during current and previous bouts, demographic features, and clinical characteristics, including handedness. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the side of pain. Results: The 227 patients with CH included 131 (57.7%) with right-sided pain and 86 (37.9%) with left-sided pain during the current bout (p<0.001). The 189 patients with previous bouts of CH included 86.8% who consistently reported the same side of pain throughout multiple bouts (side-locked pain), with a higher prevalence of pain on the right than the left side (55.0% vs. 31.7%, p<0.001). Multivariable analyses revealed that higher age at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR]=1.045, p=0.031) and shorter CH attacks (OR=0.992, p=0.017) were associated with left-side-locked pain. However, handedness was not associated with the lateralization of leftside-locked pain. Conclusions This study has confirmed the predominance of right-sided pain throughout multiple CH bouts. We found that higher age at diagnosis and shorter CH attacks were associated with left-side-locked pain, suggesting that certain clinical factors are associated with the pain laterality. However, the underlying mechanisms linking these factors to lateralized pain remain unclear and therefore require further investigation.

Purpose: Since 1995, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA) has been periodically conducting nationwide surveys on patients with surgically treated gastric cancer. This study details the results of the survey conducted in 2023. Materials and Methods: The survey was conducted from March to December 2024 using a standardized case report form. Data were collected on 86 items, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, and surgical outcomes. The results of the 2023 survey were compared with those of previous surveys. Results: Data from 12,751 cases were collected from 66 institutions. The mean patient age was 64.6 years, and the proportion of patients aged ≥71 years increased from 9.1% in 1995 to 31.7% in 2023. The proportion of upper-third tumors slightly decreased to 16.8% compared to 20.9% in 2019. Early gastric cancer accounted for 63.1% of cases in 2023.Regarding operative procedures, a totally laparoscopic approach was most frequently applied (63.2%) in 2023, while robotic gastrectomy steadily increased to 9.5% from 2.1% in 2014.The most common anastomotic method was the Billroth II procedure (48.8%) after distal gastrectomy and double-tract reconstruction (51.9%) after proximal gastrectomy in 2023.However, the proportion of esophago-gastrostomy with anti-reflux procedures increased to 30.9%. The rates of post-operative mortality and overall complications were 1.0% and 15.3%, respectively. Conclusions The results of the 2023 nationwide survey demonstrate the current status of gastric cancer treatment in Korea. This information will provide a basis for future gastric cancer research.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: Prostate cancer ranks as the second most common cancer in men globally, representing a significant cause of cancer-related mortality. Metastasis, the spread of cancer cells from the primary site to distant organs, remains a major challenge in managing prostate cancer. Pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase 4 (PDK4) is implicated in the regulation of aerobic glycolysis, emerging as a potential player in various cancers. However, its role in prostate cancer remains unclear. This study aims to analyze PDK4 expression in prostate cancer cells and human samples, and to explore the gene's clinical significance. Materials and Methods: PDK4 expression was detected in cell lines and human tissue samples. Migration ability was analyzed using Matrigel-coated invasion chambers. Human samples were obtained from the Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital. Results: PDK4 expression was elevated in prostate cancer cell lines compared to normal prostate cells, with particularly high levels in DU145 and LnCap cell lines. PDK4 knockdown in these cell lines suppressed their invasion ability, indicating a potential role of PDK4 in prostate cancer metastasis. Furthermore, our results revealed alterations in epithelial-mesenchymal transition markers and downstream signaling molecules following PDK4 suppression, suggesting its involvement in the modulation of invasion-related pathways. Furthermore, PDK4 expression was increased in prostate cancer tissues, especially in castration-resistant prostate cancer, compared to normal prostate tissues, with PSA and PDK4 expression showing a significantly positive correlation. Conclusions PDK4 expression in prostate cancer is associated with tumor invasion and castration status. Further validation is needed to demonstrate its effectiveness as a therapeutic target.

Background: and Purpose The pain lateralization in cluster headache (CH) may be related to the asymmetry in the functions of the brain hemispheres. The right-sided dominance of pain in CH has been found inconsistently across studies, and so we aimed to characterize this and identify the factors influencing pain lateralization during current and previous bouts. Methods: This study enrolled 227 patients from the Korean Cluster Headache Registry between October 2018 and December 2020. We evaluated the side of pain during current and previous bouts, demographic features, and clinical characteristics, including handedness. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the side of pain. Results: The 227 patients with CH included 131 (57.7%) with right-sided pain and 86 (37.9%) with left-sided pain during the current bout (p<0.001). The 189 patients with previous bouts of CH included 86.8% who consistently reported the same side of pain throughout multiple bouts (side-locked pain), with a higher prevalence of pain on the right than the left side (55.0% vs. 31.7%, p<0.001). Multivariable analyses revealed that higher age at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR]=1.045, p=0.031) and shorter CH attacks (OR=0.992, p=0.017) were associated with left-side-locked pain. However, handedness was not associated with the lateralization of leftside-locked pain. Conclusions This study has confirmed the predominance of right-sided pain throughout multiple CH bouts. We found that higher age at diagnosis and shorter CH attacks were associated with left-side-locked pain, suggesting that certain clinical factors are associated with the pain laterality. However, the underlying mechanisms linking these factors to lateralized pain remain unclear and therefore require further investigation.