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: Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) is a hereditary disorder caused by germline mutation in TP53. Owing to the rarity of LFS, data on its clinical features are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics and prognosis of Korean patients with LFS. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent genetic counseling and confirmed with germline TP53 mutation in the National Cancer Center in Korea between 2011 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Data on family history with pedigree, types of mutation, clinical features, and prognosis were collected. Results: Fourteen patients with LFS were included in this study. The median age at diagnosis of the first tumor was 32 years. Missense and nonsense mutations were observed in 13 and one patients, respectively. The repeated mutations were p.Arg273His, p.Ala138Val, and pPro190Leu. The sister with breast cancer harbored the same mutation of p.Ala138Val. Seven patients had multiple primary cancers. Breast cancer was most frequently observed, and other types of tumor included sarcoma, thyroid cancer, pancreatic cancer, brain tumor, adrenocortical carcinoma, ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, colon cancer, vaginal cancer, skin cancer, and leukemia. The median follow-up period was 51.5 months. Two and four patients showed local recurrence and distant metastasis, respectively. Two patients died of leukemia and pancreatic cancer 3 and 23 months after diagnosis, respectively. Conclusion This study provides information on different characteristics of patients with LFS, including types of mutation, types of cancer, and prognostic outcomes. For more appropriate management of these patients, proper genetic screening and multidisciplinary discussion are required.

OBJECTIVES: Unequal access to cancer clinical trials is an important issue, given the potential benefits of participation for cancer patients. We evaluated regional disparities in access to cancer clinical trials in Korea. METHODS: From the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety database, we extracted 2,465 records of all cancer clinical trials approved between January 2012 and April 2023. To measure disparities in cancer clinical trial access, we calculated the ratio of clinical trials open to non-capital areas relative to those open to capital areas. We then analyzed temporal trends in this ratio, which we termed the trial geographical equity index (TGEI). RESULTS: Disparities in access to cancer clinical trials, as indicated by the TGEI, did not significantly improve during the study period (regression coefficient, 0.002; p=0.59). However, for phase II/III trials sponsored by global pharmaceutical companies, the TGEI improved significantly (regression coefficient, 0.021; p<0.01). In contrast, the TGEI deteriorated for trials initiated by investigators or those testing domestically developed therapeutics (regression coefficient, -0.015; p=0.05). Furthermore, the increasing trend of TGEI for phase II/III trials sponsored by global companies began to reverse after 2019, coinciding with the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). CONCLUSIONS Over the past decade, access to cancer clinical trials has improved in Korea, particularly for phase II/III trials evaluating therapeutics from global companies. However, this increase in accessibility has not extended to trials initiated by investigators or those assessing domestically developed therapeutics. Additionally, the impact of COVID-19 on disparities in clinical trial access should be closely monitored.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop the Guidelines for Recommendation Reporting (G-RECO) for use in the Public Health Weekly Report (PHWR) in Korea, aiming to improve the standardization, scientific accuracy, and practical applicability of recommendation reports in clinical practice guidelines. Methods: The methodology of this study aligned with the EQUATOR Network standards. A multidisciplinary research committee was formed, comprising experts in various relevant fields. The development process included a comprehensive literature review, analysis of existing guidelines, and formulation of a structured G-RECO framework with 21 key items. This was supplemented with Explanation & Elaboration documents for each item. The draft underwent rigorous revisions and evaluations by both internal and external experts. Results: By November 2023, significant progress had been made in developing a detailed G-RECO checklist and accompanying E&E documents. These tools are designed to guide authors in clear and consistent reporting of recommendation reports. The team is poised to finalize and publish the checklist and E&E documents by December 2024. Conclusion The G-RECO guidelines represent a significant advancement in the formalization and standardization of recommendation reports for the PHWR. They are expected to improve the quality of research and publications in clinical practice guidelines, contributing to the evolution of the field and enriching public health discourse. The guidelines, with their comprehensive nature and user-friendly design, will become an invaluable resource for researchers, editors, and peer reviewers in public health and epidemiology.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a reporting guideline for epidemiological survey reports, referred to as “Guidelines for Survey Reporting (G-SURE).” Methods: To develop G-SURE, we adopted a systematic approach, starting with a detailed review of recent survey reports in Public Health Weekly Report, Eurosurveillance, and Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and an analysis of current reporting standards. After drafting the guidelines, our team conducted an in-depth internal evaluation to assess their effectiveness and applicability. We then refined the guidelines based on insights from external experts and potential users, particularly those with significant experience in survey reporting. The plan also includes ongoing efforts to widely share the guidelines and update them periodically, incorporating new findings and user feedback. Results: G-SURE will provide a structured framework for reporting outbreak investigations, comprising a detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents. These will improve the transparency, consistency, and quality of public health documentation. Conclusion In this protocol article, we introduce G-SURE, a guideline developed to improve epidemiological survey research. G-SURE addresses the critical need for uniform reporting standards in epidemiological surveys, aiming to improve the quality and relevance of research outcomes in this area. This guideline is also designed to be a key resource for peer reviewers and editors, aiding them in efficiently assessing the thoroughness and accuracy of survey reports. By providing consistent reporting criteria, G-SURE seeks to minimize confusion and irregularities, which are often encountered in the process of scientific publication.

Objectives: Surveillance reporting, which is integral to public health and safety, involves the systematic collection, analysis, and dissemination of data crucial for various health and security scenarios. Despite its importance, standardized Guidelines for Surveillance Reporting (G-SIRE) are lacking, leading to inconsistencies and affecting data reliability and comparability. To address this gap, this study aimed to develop the G-SIRE, tailored to improve the clarity, transparency, and consistency of surveillance reports, thereby increasing the accuracy and usability of surveillance data for better public health outcomes. Methods: The methodology adhered to the EQUATOR Network standards, employing a multidimensional approach with a diverse expert team. The process included forming a research committee of multidisciplinary experts, conducting a thorough literature review of recent surveillance report publications, reviewing existing reporting guidelines, and developing a new set of guidelines.Continuous updates and revisions are planned to keep the guidelines relevant and effective. Results: Significant progress has been made as of November 2023 in developing comprehensive reporting guidelines for surveillance reports. A detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents have been formulated, which are anticipated to be finalized and published by December 2023. Conclusion The G-SIRE guidelines signify a major advancement in standardizing surveillance.They provide a structured approach that increases scientific accuracy, transparency, and practical applicability in this domain. The guidelines are expected to improve the quality of surveillance reporting significantly, contributing to the advancement of public health research and discourse.

Objectives: Outbreak reports are essential for documenting the spread of and responses to disease outbreaks. However, there is a lack of standardized reporting guidelines that encompass broader perspectives on outbreaks. We aimed to develop a universal reporting guideline applicable to diverse outbreak reports and community epidemic interventions, the “Guidelines for Community Outbreak Investigation Reporting (G-CORE).” Methods: G-CORE is designed to address the challenges in documenting various outbreak scenarios, including infectious diseases and non-infectious environmental hazards. The development of G-CORE involved a structured process, including a comprehensive literature review of recent outbreak reports from leading journals and an analysis of existing reporting guidelines. The process also involved project registration with the EQUATOR Network and collaboration with experts in various fields. Following the initial drafting, an internal (team) review was conducted to evaluate the guidelines' robustness and relevance. Subsequently, the guidelines underwent revision based on feedback from external experts and potential users, including authors with experience in outbreak reporting. The project also includes plans for widespread dissemination and periodic revisions to adapt to developments and user feedback. Results: G-CORE will provide a structured framework for reporting outbreak investigations, comprising a detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents. Conclusion G-CORE establishes a new standard in outbreak reporting, facilitating comprehensive, clear, and actionable public health communications. Its development marks a significant advance in the documentation and management of public health outbreaks.