Objective: Double microcatheter technique (dMC) can be the alternative to Single microcatheter technique (sMC) for challenging cases, but there is lack of studies comparing dMC to sMC especifically for small ruptured aneurysms. Our objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of dMC to sMC in treating small (≤5 mm) and tiny (≤3 mm) ruptured aneurysms. Methods: This study focused on 91 out of 280 patients who had ruptured aneurysms and underwent either single or double microcatheter coil embolization. These patients were treated with either single or double microcatheter coil embolization. We divided the patients into two groups based on the procedural method and evaluated clinical features and outcomes. Subgroup analyses were conducted specifically for tiny aneurysms, comparing the two methods, and within the dMC group, we also examined whether the aneurysm was tiny or not. In addition, univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of coil packing density. Results: The mean values for most outcome measures in the dMC group were higher than those in the sMC group, but these differences did not reach statistical significance (coil packing density, 45.739% vs. 39.943%; procedural complication, 4.17% vs. 11.94%; recanalization, 8.3% vs. 10.45%; discharge discharge modified Rankin Scale (mRS), 1.83 vs. 1.97). The comparison between tiny aneurysms and other sizes within the dMC group did not reveal any significant differences in terms of worse outcomes or increased risk. The only factor that significantly influenced coil packing density in the univariate logistic regression analysis was the size of the aneurysm (OR 0.309, 95% CI 0.169–0.566, p=0.000). Conclusions The dMC proved to be a safe and viable alternative to the sMC for treating small ruptured aneurysms in challenging cases.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, conclusively evaluating possible associations between COVID-19 vaccines and potential adverse events was of critical importance. The National Academy of Medicine of Korea established the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center (CoVaSC) with support from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency to investigate the scientific relationship between COVID-19 vaccines and suspected adverse events. Although determining whether the COVID-19 vaccine was responsible for any suspected adverse event necessitated a systematic approach, traditional causal inference theories, such as Hill's criteria, encountered certain limitations and criticisms. To facilitate a systematic and evidence-based evaluation, the United States Institute of Medicine, at the request of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, offered a detailed causality assessment framework in 2012, which was updated in the recent report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) in 2024.This framework, based on a weight-of-evidence approach, allows the independent evaluation of both epidemiological and mechanistic evidence, culminating in a comprehensive conclusion about causality. Epidemiological evidence derived from population studies is categorized into four levels—high, moderate, limited, or insufficient—while mechanistic evidence, primarily from biological and clinical studies in animals and individuals, is classified as strong, intermediate, weak, or lacking. The committee then synthesizes these two types of evidence to draw a conclusion about the causal relationship, which can be described as “convincingly supports” (“evidence established” in the 2024 NASEM report), “favors acceptance,” “favors rejection,” or “inadequate to accept or reject.” The CoVaSC has established an independent committee to conduct causality assessments using the weightof-evidence framework, specifically for evaluating the causality of adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the weight-ofevidence framework and to detail the considerations involved in its practical application in the CoVaSC.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Committee (CoVaSC) was established in November 2021 to address the growing need for independent, in-depth scientific evidence on adverse events (AEs) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. This initiative was requested by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and led by the National Academy of Medicine of Korea. In September 2022, the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center was established, strengthening CoVaSC’s initiatives. The center has conducted various studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. During CoVaSC’s second research year, from September 29, 2022 to July 19, 2023, the center was restructured into 4 departments: Epidemiological Research, Clinical Research, Communication & Education, and International Cooperation & Policy Research. Its main activities include (1) managing CoVaSC and the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center, (2) surveying domestic and international trends in AE causality investigation, (3) assessing AEs following COVID-19 vaccination, (4) fostering international collaboration and policy research, and (5) organizing regular fora and training sessions for the public and clinicians. Causality assessments have been conducted for 27 diseases, and independent research has been conducted after organizing ad hoc committees comprising both epidemiologists and clinical experts on each AE of interest. The research process included protocol development, data analysis, interpretation of results, and causality assessment. These research outcomes have been shared transparently with the public and healthcare experts through various fora. The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center plans to continue strengthening and expanding its research activities to provide reliable, high-quality safety information to the public.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of red ginseng oil (RXGIN) in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Materials and Methods: Men aged between 40 and 75 years with a total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of 8 to 19 points were recruited from April 2020 to December 2020. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the RXGIN group or the control group in a 1:1 ratio and received either RXGIN or placebo daily for 12 weeks. For the primary outcome, changes in IPSS scores at 6 and 12 weeks from baseline were analyzed. The secondary outcomes were changes in International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), maximum urinary flow rate, and post-void residual volume at weeks 6 and 12 compared to baseline. Urine analysis and blood tests were additionally performed for safety assessment. Results: A total of 88 subjects (RXGIN group, 46; control group, 42) completed the study. The total IPSS and IPSS subscores (residual urine sensation, frequency, intermittency, urgency, weak stream, straining, nocturia, and quality of life) were significantly improved in the RXGIN group compared to the control group at weeks 6 and 12. Total IIEF and sexual desire were significantly improved in the RXGIN group at week 6 and week 12, respectively, but there were no significant changes in the level of serum testosterone or dihydrotestosterone. The serum prostate-specific antigen showed significant decrease at weeks 12. No serious adverse events leading to discontinuation of the study drug were observed in the RXGIN group. Conclusions Red ginseng oil (RXGIN) appears to be safe and effective in improving lower urinary tract symptoms in men and may also improve some aspects of sexual function.

Purpose: Renal tumors account for approximately 7% of all childhood cancers. These include Wilms tumor (WT), clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK), malignant rhabdoid tumor of the kidney (MRTK), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), congenital mesoblastic nephroma (CMN) and other rare tumors. We investigated the epidemiology of pediatric renal tumors in Korea. Materials and Methods: From January 2001 to December 2015, data of pediatric patients (0–18 years) newly-diagnosed with renal tumors at 26 hospitals were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Among 439 patients (male, 240), the most common tumor was WT (n=342, 77.9%), followed by RCC (n=36, 8.2%), CCSK (n=24, 5.5%), MRTK (n=16, 3.6%), CMN (n=12, 2.7%), and others (n=9, 2.1%). Median age at diagnosis was 27.1 months (range 0-225.5) and median follow-up duration was 88.5 months (range 0-211.6). Overall, 32 patients died, of whom 17, 11, 1, and 3 died of relapse, progressive disease, second malignant neoplasm, and treatment-related mortality. Five-year overall survival and event free survival were 97.2% and 84.8% in WT, 90.6% and 82.1% in RCC, 81.1% and 63.6% in CCSK, 60.3% and 56.2% in MRTK, and 100% and 91.7% in CMN, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion The pediatric renal tumor types in Korea are similar to those previously reported in other countries. WT accounted for a large proportion and survival was excellent. Non-Wilms renal tumors included a variety of tumors and showed inferior outcome, especially MRTK. Further efforts are necessary to optimize the treatment and analyze the genetic characteristics of pediatric renal tumors in Korea.

With the introduction of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines, the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) commissioned the National Academy of Medicine of Korea to gather experts to independently assess post-vaccination adverse events. Accordingly, the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Committee (CoVaSC) was launched in November 2021 to perform safety studies and establish evidence for policy guidance. The CoVaSC established 3 committees for epidemiology, clinical research, and communication. The CoVaSC mainly utilizes pseudonymized data linking KDCA’s COVID-19 vaccination data and the National Health Insurance Service’s claims data. The CoVaSC’s 5-step research process involves defining the target diseases and organizing ad-hoc committees, developing research protocols, performing analyses, assessing causal relationships, and announcing research findings and utilizing them to guide compensation policies. As of 2022, the CoVaSC completed this research process for 15 adverse events. The CoVaSC launched the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center in September 2022 and has been reorganized into 4 divisions to promote research including international collaborative studies, long-/short-term follow-up studies, and education programs. Through these enhancements, the CoVaSC will continue to swiftly provide scientific evidence for COVID-19 vaccine research and compensation and may serve as a model for preparing for future epidemics of new diseases.

Purpose: This study evaluated whether combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer (MRGC) as first-line chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: Elderly (≥ 70 years) chemo-naïve patients with MRGC were allocated to receive either combination therapy (group A: 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]/oxaliplatin, capecitabine/oxaliplatin, capecitabine/cisplatin, or S-1/cisplatin) or monotherapy (group B: 5-FU, capecitabine, or S-1). In group A, starting doses were 80% of standard doses, and they could be escalated to 100% at the discretion of the investigator. Primary endpoint was to confirm superior overall survival (OS) of combination therapy vs. monotherapy. Results: After 111 of the planned 238 patients were randomized, enrollment was terminated due to poor accrual. In the full-analysis population (group A [n=53] and group B [n=51]), median OS of combination therapy vs. monotherapy was 11.5 vs. 7.5 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.30; p=0.231). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 vs. 3.7 months (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.83; p=0.005). In subgroup analyses, patients aged 70-74 years tended to have superior OS with combination therapy (15.9 vs. 7.2 months, p=0.056). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred more frequently in group A vs. group B. However, among severe TRAEs (≥ grade 3), there were no TRAEs with a frequency difference of > 5%. Conclusion Combination therapy was associated with numerically improved OS, although statistically insignificant, and a significant PFS benefit compared with monotherapy. Although combination therapy showed more frequent TRAEs, there was no difference in the frequency of severe TRAEs.

Background: Increasing longevity has caused the very old population to become the fastest-growing segment. The number of centenarians (over 100 years old) is increasing rapidly. Fractures in the elderly lead to excessive medical costs and decreased quality of life with socioeconomic burdens. However, little research has thoroughly examined the functional outcomes and mortality of hip fractures in centenarians. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study. Sixty-eight centenarian hip fracture patients were admitted to the 10 institutions from February 2004 to December 2019. Fifty-six patients with 1-year follow-up were finally included. The following data were obtained: sex, age, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index value on the operation day, Koval’s classification for ambulatory ability, type of fracture, the time interval from trauma to surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, surgery-related complications, and duration of hospital stay. Postoperative Koval’s classification (at 1 year after surgery) and information about death were also collected. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the risk factors affecting mortality 1 year after surgery. Results: Mortality rates were 26.8% at 6 months and 39.3% at 1 year. The 90-day mortality was 19.6%, and one of them (2.1%) died in the hospital. The 1-year mortality rates for the community ambulatory and non-community ambulatory groups were 29% and 52%, respectively. Only 9 (16.1%) were able to walk outdoors 1 year after surgery. The remaining 47 patients (83.9%) had to stay indoors after surgery. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the pre-injury ambulatory level (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.884; p = 0.034) was associated with the risk of mortality. Conclusions We report a 1-year mortality rate of 39.3% in centenarian patients with hip fractures. The risk factor for mortality was the pre-injury ambulatory status. This could be an important consideration in the planning of treatment for centenarian hip fracture patients.

Background: and Purpose Data regarding the effects of cannabidiol (CBD) on the quality of life (QOL) are currently inadequate. We assessed the QOL of pediatric patients with epilepsy who were treated with CBD. Methods: This prospective, open-label study included pediatric and adolescent patients (aged 2–18 years) with Dravet syndrome or Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Oral CBD was administered at 10 mg/kg/day. The Korean version of the Quality Of Life in Childhood Epilepsy (QOLCE) questionnaire was administered when CBD treatment began and again after 6 months. Adaptive behavior was measured using the Korean versions of the Child Behavior Checklist (K-CBCL) and the second edition of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (Vineland-II). Results: This study included 41 patients (11 with Dravet syndrome and 30 with LennoxGastaut syndrome), of which 25 were male. The median age was 4.1 years. After 6 months, 26.8% (11/41) of patients experienced a ≥50% reduction in the number of seizures. The total score for the QOLCE questionnaire did not change from baseline to after 6 months of CBD treatment (85.71±39.65 vs. 83.12±48.01, respectively; p=0.630). The score in the motor skills domain of Vineland-II reduced from 48.67±13.43 at baseline to 45.18±14.08 after 6 months of treatment (p=0.005). No other Vineland-II scores and no K-CBCL scores had changed after 6 months of CBD treatment. Conclusions CBD is an efficacious antiseizure drug used to treat Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. However, it did not improve the patient QOL in our study, possibly because all of our patients had profound intellectual disabilities.