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.

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.

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: The treatment of male breast cancer (MBC) has been extrapolated from female breast cancer (FBC) because of its rarity despite their different clinicopathologic characteristics. We aimed to investigate the distribution of intrinsic subtypes based on immunohistochemistry, their clinical impact, and treatment pattern in clinical practice through a multicenter study in Korea. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 248 MBC patients from 18 institutions across the country from January 1995 to July 2016. Results: The median age of MBC patients was 63 years (range, 25 to 102 years). Among 148 intrinsic subtype classified patients, 61 (41.2%), 44 (29.7%), 29 (19.5%), and 14 (9.5%) were luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and triple-negative breast cancer, respectively. Luminal A subtype showed trends for superior survival compared to other subtypes. Most hormone receptor-positive patients (166 patients, 82.6%) received adjuvant endocrine treatment. Five-year completion of adjuvant endocrine treatment was associated with superior disease-free survival (DFS) in patients classified with an intrinsic subtype (hazard ratio [HR], 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.49; p=0.002) and in all patients (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.54; p=0.003). Conclusion Distribution of subtypes of MBC was similar to FBC and luminal type A was most common. Overall survival tended to be improved for luminal A subtype, although there was no statistical significance. Completion of adjuvant endocrine treatment was associated with prolonged DFS in intrinsic subtype classified patients. MBC patients tended to receive less treatment. MBC patients should receive standard treatment according to guidelines as FBC patients.

Despite the availability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Korea, need remains for pangenotypic regimens that can be used in the presence of hepatic impairment, comorbidities, or prior treatment failure. We investigated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir for 12 weeks in HCV-infected Korean adults. Methods: This Phase 3b, multicenter, open-label study included 2 cohorts. In Cohort 1, participants with HCV genotype 1 or 2 and who were treatment-naive or treatment-experienced with interferon-based treatments, received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir 400/100 mg/day. In Cohort 2, HCV genotype 1 infected individuals who previously received an NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen ≥ 4 weeks received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir 400/100/100 mg/day. Decompensated cirrhosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary endpoint was SVR12, defined as HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL 12 weeks following treatment. Results: Of 53 participants receiving sofosbuvir–velpatasvir, 52 (98.1%) achieved SVR12. The single participant who did not achieve SVR12 experienced an asymptomatic Grade 3 ASL/ALT elevation on day 15 and discontinued treatment. The event resolved without intervention. All 33 participants (100%) treated with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir achieved SVR 12. Overall, sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir were safe and well tolerated. Three participants (5.6%) in Cohort 1 and 1 participant (3.0%) in Cohort 2 had serious adverse events, but none were considered treatment-related. No deaths or grade 4 laboratory abnormalities were reported. Conclusions: Treatment with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir or sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir was safe and resulted in high SVR12 rates in Korean HCV patients.

Purpose: Oxaliplatin, a component of the capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) regimen, has a more favorable toxicity profile than cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric cancer (GC). However, oxaliplatin can induce sensory neuropathy and cumulative, dose-related toxicities. Thus, the capecitabine maintenance regimen may achieve the maximum treatment effect while reducing the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin. This study aimed to compare the survival of patients with advanced GC between capecitabine maintenance and observation after 1st line XELOX chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: Sixty-three patients treated with six cycles of XELOX for advanced GC in six hospitals of the Catholic University of Korea were randomized 1:1 to receive capecitabine maintenance or observation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), analyzed using a two-sided log-rank test stratified at a 5% significance level. Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 32 and 31 patients were randomized into the maintenance and observation groups, respectively. After randomization, the median number of capecitabine maintenance cycles was 6. The PFS was significantly higher in the maintenance group than the observation group (6.3 vs. 4.1 months, P=0.010). Overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups (18.2 vs. 16.5 months, P=0.624). Toxicities, such as hand-foot syndrome, were reported in some maintenance group patients. Maintenance treatment was a significant factor associated with PFS in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.472; 95% confidence interval, 0.250–0.890; P=0.020). Conclusions After 6 cycles of XELOX chemotherapy, capecitabine maintenance significantly prolonged PFS compared with observation, and toxicity was manageable. Maintenance treatment was a significant prognostic factor associated with PFS.

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is defined as the occurrence of spontaneous wheals, angioedema, or both for >6 weeks in the absence of specific causes. It is a common condition associated with substantial disease burden both for affected individuals and societies in many countries, including Korea. CSU frequently persists for several years and requires high-intensity treatment; therefore, patients experience deteriorations in quality of life and medication-associated complications. During the last decade, there have been major advances in the pharmacological treatment of CSU and there is an outstanding need for evidence-based guidelines that reflect clinical practice in Korea. The guidelines reported here represent a joint initiative of the Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the Korean Dermatological Association, and aim to provide evidence-based guidance for the management of CSU in Korean adults and children. In Part 1, disease definition, guideline scope and development methodology as well as evidence-based recommendations on the use of antihistamines and corticosteroids are summarized.

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is defined as the occurrence of spontaneous wheals, angioedema, or both for >6 weeks in the absence of specific causes. It is a common condition associated with substantial disease burden both for affected individuals and societies in many countries, including Korea. CSU frequently persists for several years and requires high-intensity treatment; therefore, patients experience deteriorations in quality of life and medication-associated complications. During the last decade, there have been major advances in the pharmacological treatment of CSU and there is an outstanding need for evidence-based guidelines that reflect clinical practice in Korea. The guidelines reported here represent a joint initiative of the Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology and the Korean Dermatological Association, and aim to provide evidence-based guidance for the management of CSU in Korean adults and children. In Part 1, disease definition, guideline scope and development methodology as well as evidence-based recommendations on the use of antihistamines and corticosteroids are summarized.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical characteristics and treatment pattern of ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) in Korea and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in earlystage. Materials and Methods: Medical records of 308 cases of from 21 institutions were reviewed and data including age, performance status, endometriosis, thromboembolism, stage, cancer antigen 125, treatment, recurrence, and death were collected. Results: Regarding stage of OCCC, it was stage I in 194 (63.6%), stage II in 34 (11.1%), stage III in 66 (21.6%), and stage IV in 11 (3.6%) patients. All patients underwent surgery. Optimal surgery (residual disease ≤ 1 cm) was achieved in 89.3%. Majority of patients (80.5%) received postoperative chemotherapy. The most common regimen was taxane-platinum combination (96%). Median relapse-free survival (RFS) was 138.5 months for stage I, 33.4 for stage II, 19.3 for stage III, and 9.7 for stage IV. Median overall survival (OS) were not reached, 112.4, 48.7, and 18.3 months for stage I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Early-stage (stage I), endometriosis, and optimal debulking were identified as favorable prognostic factors for RFS. Early-stage and optimal debulking were also favorable prognostic factors for OS. Majority of patients with early-stage received adjuvant chemotherapy. However, additional survival benefit was not found in terms of recurrence. Conclusion Majority of patients had early-stage and received postoperative chemotherapy regardless of stage. Early-stage and optimal debulking were identified as favorable prognostic factors. In stage IA or IB, adding adjuvant chemotherapy did not show difference in survival. Further study focusing on OCCC is required.

PURPOSE: This study was intended to investigate the frequency of job performance of the Korean professional medical support staffs (PMSS).METHOD: The data of 1,666 PMSS from 36 hospitals and over 500 beds were analyzed. The participants were divided into 5 groups: advanced practice nurses (APN), clinical nurse experts, physician assistants (PA), coordinators, and others.RESULTS: Among the 5 main domains of job performance, advanced clinical practice has the highest frequency (111.36 d/y), followed by consultation/collaboration (75.66 d/y), education/counseling (53.54 d/y), leadership (23.90 d/y), and research (19.14 d/y). There was a significant difference in the frequency of job performance between the 5 groups of participants. The invasive activities were more frequent in the PA group. In the education and counseling domain, APNs had a higher level of job frequency than others (p < .001). In the research and leadership domains, APNs and coordinators had more prominent performance frequency than other groups (p < .01). However, there are some ambiguities in the job performance of the 5 groups depending on institutional characteristics.CONCLUSION: To establish the scope of work of PMSS, organizational and individual efforts are needed to promote and expand the leadership and research domains. To resolve the ambiguities of PMSS' roles, it is necessary to reorganize their titles.
Counseling ; Education ; Humans ; Job Description ; Leadership ; Methods ; Nurse Clinicians ; Physician Assistants ; Work Performance