Weak D type 102 allele (RHD*01W.102) carrying a missense variant (c.73A＞T, p.Ile25Phe) in exon 1 of the RHD has not been reported in Koreans to date. This is the first report of the weak D type 102 allele in the Korean population. The proposita, a 35-year-old woman, showed a serological weak D phenotype in routine RhD typing. Sequencing of all 10 RHD exons and zygosity testing targeting the hybrid Rhesus box revealed this proposita to harbor the weak D type 102 allele, as well as an RHD deletion (RHD*01W.102/RHD*01N.01). Family studies showed that the weak D type 102 allele was also present in her father and older brother (both assumed to be RHD*01W.102/RHD*01) but not in her mother and oldest brother (both assumed to be RHD*01/RHD*01N.01). In silico analysis of the replacement of isoleucine by phenylalanine at position 25 was done with PolyPhen-2, SIFT, and PROVEAN. While PolyPhen-2 predicted the variant as benign, SIFT and PROVEAN predicted it as damaging and deleterious, respectively, suggesting RHD c.73A>T (I25F) as the cause of serologic weak D phenotype. This patient should be treated as D-negative, when transfusion is needed.

Purpose: The metabolism of tamoxifen is influenced by various cytochrome p450 enzymes, including CYP2D6 and CYP2C19, leading to variations in the levels of endoxifen, even with the same tamoxifen dose. However, the clinical significance of endoxifen for the prognosis of breast cancer patients remains controversial. This study aimed to elucidate the relevance of endoxifen level to recurrence-free survival censored with tamoxifen discontinuation (RFSt), representing the RFS for tamoxifen itself, of breast cancer patients and determine a suitable cutoff for prognostication. Materials and Methods: The study included 478 breast cancer patients. Tamoxifen and its metabolites, including endoxifen, were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. An optimal cutoff was determined with maximally selected rank statistics. Survival analysis and Cox regression were conducted based on this cutoff. Results: An endoxifen level of 21.00 ng/mL was the optimal cutoff for prognostication. Survival analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in RFSt between the low endoxifen group (≤ 21.00 ng/mL) and the high endoxifen group (> 21.00 ng/mL) (log-rank test, p=0.032). The 10-year probability of RFSt was 83.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 77.0 to 89.9) and 88.3% (95% CI, 83.3 to 93.5) in the low and high endoxifen groups, respectively. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression indicated endoxifen concentration as a significant factor associated with prognosis. Conclusion Endoxifen could serve as a marker for appropriate tamoxifen treatment with a cutoff of 21.00 ng/mL. Based on this cutoff, therapeutic drug monitoring would benefit patients displaying suboptimal endoxifen concentrations.

Purpose: The metabolism of tamoxifen is influenced by various cytochrome p450 enzymes, including CYP2D6 and CYP2C19, leading to variations in the levels of endoxifen, even with the same tamoxifen dose. However, the clinical significance of endoxifen for the prognosis of breast cancer patients remains controversial. This study aimed to elucidate the relevance of endoxifen level to recurrence-free survival censored with tamoxifen discontinuation (RFSt), representing the RFS for tamoxifen itself, of breast cancer patients and determine a suitable cutoff for prognostication. Materials and Methods: The study included 478 breast cancer patients. Tamoxifen and its metabolites, including endoxifen, were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. An optimal cutoff was determined with maximally selected rank statistics. Survival analysis and Cox regression were conducted based on this cutoff. Results: An endoxifen level of 21.00 ng/mL was the optimal cutoff for prognostication. Survival analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in RFSt between the low endoxifen group (≤ 21.00 ng/mL) and the high endoxifen group (> 21.00 ng/mL) (log-rank test, p=0.032). The 10-year probability of RFSt was 83.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 77.0 to 89.9) and 88.3% (95% CI, 83.3 to 93.5) in the low and high endoxifen groups, respectively. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression indicated endoxifen concentration as a significant factor associated with prognosis. Conclusion Endoxifen could serve as a marker for appropriate tamoxifen treatment with a cutoff of 21.00 ng/mL. Based on this cutoff, therapeutic drug monitoring would benefit patients displaying suboptimal endoxifen concentrations.

Purpose: The metabolism of tamoxifen is influenced by various cytochrome p450 enzymes, including CYP2D6 and CYP2C19, leading to variations in the levels of endoxifen, even with the same tamoxifen dose. However, the clinical significance of endoxifen for the prognosis of breast cancer patients remains controversial. This study aimed to elucidate the relevance of endoxifen level to recurrence-free survival censored with tamoxifen discontinuation (RFSt), representing the RFS for tamoxifen itself, of breast cancer patients and determine a suitable cutoff for prognostication. Materials and Methods: The study included 478 breast cancer patients. Tamoxifen and its metabolites, including endoxifen, were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. An optimal cutoff was determined with maximally selected rank statistics. Survival analysis and Cox regression were conducted based on this cutoff. Results: An endoxifen level of 21.00 ng/mL was the optimal cutoff for prognostication. Survival analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in RFSt between the low endoxifen group (≤ 21.00 ng/mL) and the high endoxifen group (> 21.00 ng/mL) (log-rank test, p=0.032). The 10-year probability of RFSt was 83.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 77.0 to 89.9) and 88.3% (95% CI, 83.3 to 93.5) in the low and high endoxifen groups, respectively. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression indicated endoxifen concentration as a significant factor associated with prognosis. Conclusion Endoxifen could serve as a marker for appropriate tamoxifen treatment with a cutoff of 21.00 ng/mL. Based on this cutoff, therapeutic drug monitoring would benefit patients displaying suboptimal endoxifen concentrations.

Background: Despite the popularity of the NeoBase 2 Non-derivatized MSMS assay (PerkinElmer, Turku, Finland), there are no reports of its comprehensive evaluation, including the ability to distinguish transient tyrosinemia of the newborn (TTN) from tyrosinemia type 1 (TYR 1) using succinylacetone (SUAC). No newborn screening (NBS) cutoffs for preterm neonates in the Korean population have been suggested. We evaluated the NeoBase 2 assay and identified analytes requiring different cutoffs in preterm neonates. Methods: Residual NBS dried blood spot samples and proficiency testing (PT) materials of the Newborn Screening Quality Assurance Program and the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service were used. Precision, accuracy, limit of detection (LOD), lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), linearity, recovery, carryover, and performance of SUAC were evaluated. Cutoffs were determined, and analytes requiring different cutoffs in preterm neonates were investigated. Results: Mean CVs for within-run and between-day precision were within 15%. Accuracy analysis indicated high agreement with in-house derivatized assay results and results of other PT participants. All analytes demonstrated acceptable LOD, LLOQ, and linearity. Recoveries were acceptable, except for SUAC. Carryover was negligible. Cutoffs were established for all analytes; Tyr, adenosine, and C20:0-lysophosphatidylcholine required different cutoffs in preterm neonates. Differential diagnosis of TYR 1 and TTN was successful with simultaneous Tyr and SUAC measurement. Conclusions The NeoBase 2 assay demonstrated satisfactory performance. The additional analytes provide a wider diagnostic coverage, and the simultaneous measurement of Tyr and SUAC is efficient in excluding TYR 1. The new cutoffs for preterm neonates may decrease false-positive rates, without compromising diagnostic sensitivity.

Background: CD14 recognizes lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and presepsin is a fragment of soluble CD14. Still, it remains uncertain whether Gram-negative bacteria induce higher presepsin levels than other microorganisms. To address this question, this study aimed to analyze presepsin levels based on microorganisms isolated in blood cultures. Materials and Methods: This study was a single-center study comprising suspected sepsis patients enrolled from July 2020 to September 2020. A total of 95 patients with a single isolate confirmed in blood culture were analyzed to evaluate if there are any differences in presepsin levels according to microbial isolates. Plasma presepsin level was measured using PATHFAST assay kit and analyzer (LSI Medience Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Results: There were 26 Gram-positive bacteremia, 65 Gram-negative bacteremia, and 3 fungemia patients with median presepsin levels of 869, 1,439, and 11,951 pg/mL, respectively. Besides, one case of algaemia demonstrated a presepsin level of 1,231 pg/mL. Our results showed no statistically significant difference in presepsin levels among patients with Gram-positive bacteremia, Gram-negative bacteremia, and fungemia. Furthermore, presepsin levels did not differ significantly among bloodstream infections caused by bacteria that were isolated from at least three different patients. In particular, Gram-positive bacteria such as Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis were able to induce presepsin levels comparable to those induced by Gram-negative bacteria. Conclusion We demonstrated that there were no significant differences in plasma presepsin levels according to microbial isolates in blood culture. The major cause of the variability in presepsin levels during bloodstream infection might be the immunogenicity of each microorganism rather than the presence of LPS in the microorganism.

As nucleocapsid protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is immunogenic but not targeted in vaccines, it could be useful in distinguishing natural infection from vaccination. We aimed to investigate the clinical utility of sero-immunological responses against the nucleocapsid protein. Nucleocapsid antibody immunoassay study with 302 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients showed lower titers in immunocompromised patients (P < 0.001), higher titers in higher severity (P = 0.031), and different seroconversion rates and titers according to variants of concern. Longitudinal evaluation of nucleocapsid antibodies using 513 samples from 291 COVID-19 patients revealed that it could persist up to 556 days from symptom onset. Interferon gamma release assay against the nucleocapsid protein showed poor response, precluding the deduction of a cut-off for the nucleocapsid protein. In conclusion, nucleocapsid antibody provides instructive clues about the immunogenicity of nucleocapsid proteins by different seroconversion rates and titers according to the severity of infection, host immune status, and different variants of concern.

Purpose: Real-world experience with tocilizumab in combination with dexamethasone in patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) needs to be investigated. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effect of severity-adjusted dosing of dexamethasone in combination with tocilizumab for severe COVID-19 from August 2020 to August 2021. The primary endpoint was 30-day clinical recovery, which was defined as no oxygen requirement or referral after recovery. Results: A total of 66 patients were evaluated, including 33 patients in the dexamethasone (Dexa) group and 33 patients in the dexamethasone plus tocilizumab (DexaToci) group. The DexaToci group showed a statistically significant benefit in 30-day clinical recovery, compared to the Dexa group (p=0.024). In multivariable analyses, peak FiO2 within 3 days and tocilizumab combination were consistently significant for 30-day recovery (all p<0.05). The DexaToci group showed a significantly steeper decrease in FiO2 (-4.2±2.6) than the Dexa group (−2.7±2.6; p=0.021) by hospital day 15. The duration of oxygen requirement was significantly shorter in the DexaToci group than the Dexa group (median, 10.0 days vs. 17.0 days; p=0.006). Infectious complications and cellular and humoral immune responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the convalescence stage were not different between the two groups. Conclusion A combination of severity-adjusted dexamethasone and tocilizumab for the treatment of severe COVID-19 improved clinical recovery without increasing infectious complications or hindering the immune response against SARS-CoV-2.