Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a chronic autoimmune disease of the peripheral nervous system, primarily treated with corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulin as first-line therapies. Early treatment yields better outcome before nerve damage caused by the immune response. Once axonal damage has progressed, immunotherapy becomes ineffective, making early intervention crucial. Additionally, as treatment responses vary among patients, it is essential to assess treatment efficacy objectively and tailor therapy accordingly. Since there are currently no biomarkers that accurately reflect disease status, regular physical examinations are necessary to evaluate treatment effectiveness and adjust maintenance therapy. This review outlines the current clinical guidelines for the treatment of CIDP and explores emerging therapeutic options, including neonatal Fc receptor inhibitors and complement pathway inhibitors.

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a chronic autoimmune disease of the peripheral nervous system, primarily treated with corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulin as first-line therapies. Early treatment yields better outcome before nerve damage caused by the immune response. Once axonal damage has progressed, immunotherapy becomes ineffective, making early intervention crucial. Additionally, as treatment responses vary among patients, it is essential to assess treatment efficacy objectively and tailor therapy accordingly. Since there are currently no biomarkers that accurately reflect disease status, regular physical examinations are necessary to evaluate treatment effectiveness and adjust maintenance therapy. This review outlines the current clinical guidelines for the treatment of CIDP and explores emerging therapeutic options, including neonatal Fc receptor inhibitors and complement pathway inhibitors.

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a chronic autoimmune disease of the peripheral nervous system, primarily treated with corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulin as first-line therapies. Early treatment yields better outcome before nerve damage caused by the immune response. Once axonal damage has progressed, immunotherapy becomes ineffective, making early intervention crucial. Additionally, as treatment responses vary among patients, it is essential to assess treatment efficacy objectively and tailor therapy accordingly. Since there are currently no biomarkers that accurately reflect disease status, regular physical examinations are necessary to evaluate treatment effectiveness and adjust maintenance therapy. This review outlines the current clinical guidelines for the treatment of CIDP and explores emerging therapeutic options, including neonatal Fc receptor inhibitors and complement pathway inhibitors.

The occurrence of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rarely been reported. We describe two patients who were diagnosed with CIDP after COVID-19 vaccination. A 72-year-old man presented with a progressive tingling sensation and weakness below both knees for two weeks. He had been vaccinated against COVID-19 (mRNA-1273 vaccine) a month before the appearance of symptoms. Demyelinating polyneuropathy was observed in the nerve conduction studies (NCS). Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) was administered under the diagnosis of GuillainBarré syndrome (GBS), and his symptoms were improved. However, his symptoms relapsed at 10 weeks from the onset. Oral prednisolone, azathioprine, and IVIg were administered as treatment. The second case was a 50-year-old man who complained of a bilateral leg tingling sensation and gait disturbance lasting four weeks. He had received the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine against COVID-19 five weeks prior. Demyelinating polyneuropathy was observed in the NCS. He was treated with oral prednisolone, azathioprine, and IVIg for CIDP because his symptoms had lasted for more than 12 weeks from the onset. A causal relationship has not been established between COVID-19 vaccination and CIDP; however, CIDP may follow COVID-19 vaccination. As CIDP treatment is different from that for GBS, clinicians should closely monitor patients diagnosed with GBS associated with COVID-19 whether they deteriorate after initial treatment.

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.

Background: There has been no comparison of the determinants of admission route between acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We examined whether factors associated with direct versus transferred-in admission to regional cardiocerebrovascular centers (RCVCs) differed between AIS and AMI. Methods: Using a nationwide RCVC registry, we identified consecutive patients presenting with AMI and AIS between July 2016 and December 2018. We explored factors associated with direct admission to RCVCs in patients with AIS and AMI and examined whether those associations differed between AIS and AMI, including interaction terms between each factor and disease type in multivariable models. To explore the influence of emergency medical service (EMS) paramedics on hospital selection, stratified analyses according to use of EMS were also performed. Results: Among the 17,897 and 8,927 AIS and AMI patients, 66.6% and 48.2% were directly admitted to RCVCs, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that previous coronary heart disease, prehospital awareness, higher education level, and EMS use increased the odds of direct admission to RCVCs, but the odds ratio (OR) was different between AIS and AMI (for the first 3 factors, AMI > AIS; for EMS use, AMI < AIS). EMS use was the single most important factor for both AIS and AMI (OR, 4.72 vs. 3.90). Hypertension and hyperlipidemia increased, while living alone decreased the odds of direct admission only in AMI;additionally, age (65–74 years), previous stroke, and presentation during non-working hours increased the odds only in AIS. EMS use weakened the associations between direct admission and most factors in both AIS and AMI. Conclusions Various patient factors were differentially associated with direct admission to RCVCs between AIS and AMI. Public education for symptom awareness and use of EMS is essential in optimizing the transportation and hospitalization of patients with AMI and AIS.

Purpose: Rapid detection of etiologic organisms is crucial for initiating appropriate therapy in patients with central nervous system (CNS) infection. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the BioFire® Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) panel in detecting etiologic organisms in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from febrile infants. Methods: CSF samples from infants aged <90 days who were evaluated for fever were collected between January 2016 and July 2019 at the Seoul National University Children's Hospital. We performed BioFire® ME panel testing of CSF samples that had been used for CSF analysis and conventional tests (bacterial culture, Xpert® enterovirus assay, and herpes simplex virus-1 and -2 polymerase chain reaction) and stored at −70°C until further use. Results: In total, 72 (24 pathogen-identified and 48 pathogen-unidentified) CSF samples were included. Using BioFire® ME panel testing, 41 (85.4%) of the 48 pathogen-unidentified CSF samples yielded negative results and 22 (91.7%) of the 24 pathogen-identified CSF samples yielded the same results (enterovirus in 19, Streptococcus agalactiae in 2, and Streptococcus pneumoniae in 1) as those obtained using the conventional tests, thereby resulting in an overall agreement of 87.5% (63/72). Six of the 7 pathogen-unidentified samples were positive for human parechovirus (HPeV) via BioFire® ME panel testing. Conclusions Compared with the currently available etiologic tests for CNS infection, BioFire® ME panel testing demonstrated a high agreement score for pathogen-identified samples and enabled HPeV detection in young infants. The clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of BioFire® ME panel testing in children must be evaluated for its wider application.

Background: Pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies have been used to treat patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). However, the effect of therapies in cancer patients has yet to be investigated comprehensively. We hypothesized that cyclic thermal therapy would improve blood flow and microcirculation and improve the symptoms driven by CIPN. Methods: The criteria of assessment were blood volume in region of interest (ROI) in the images, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer–Quality of Life Questionnaire–Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy 20 questionnaire scores. The blood volume was quantified by using red blood cell (RBC) scintigraphy. All patients were treated 10 times during 10 days. The thermal stimulations, between 15° and 41°, were repeatedly delivered to the patient’s hands. Results: The total score of the questionnaires, the score of questions related to the upper limbs, the score of questions closely related to the upper limbs, and the score excluding the upper limbs questions was decreased. The blood volume was decreased, and the variance of blood volume was decreased. During cooling stimulation, the blood volume was decreased, and its variance was decreased. During warming stimulation, the blood volume was decreased, and its variance was decreased. Conclusions We suggest that cyclic thermal therapy is useful to alleviate CIPN symptoms by blood circulation improvement. RBC scintigraphy can provide the quantitative information on blood volume under certain conditions such as stress, as well as rest, in peripheral tissue.

Objective: To evaluate the association of MRI features with the major genomic profiles and prognosis of World Health Organization grade III (G3) gliomas compared with those of glioblastomas (GBMs). Materials and Methods: We enrolled 76 G3 glioma and 155 GBM patients with pathologically confirmed disease who had pretreatment brain MRI and major genetic information of tumors. Qualitative and quantitative imaging features, including volumetrics and histogram parameters, such as normalized cerebral blood volume (nCBV), cerebral blood flow (nCBF), and apparent diffusion coefficient (nADC) were evaluated. The G3 gliomas were divided into three groups for the analysis: with this isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutation, IDH mutation and a chromosome arm 1p/19q-codeleted (IDHmut1p/19qdel), IDH mutation, 1p/19q-nondeleted (IDHmut1p/19qnondel), and IDH wildtype (IDHwt). A prediction model for the genetic profiles of G3 gliomas was developed and validated on a separate cohort. Both the quantitative and qualitative imaging parameters and progression-free survival (PFS) of G3 gliomas were compared and survival analysis was performed. Moreover, the imaging parameters and PFS between IDHwt G3 gliomas and GBMs were compared. Results: IDHmut G3 gliomas showed a larger volume (p = 0.017), lower nCBF (p = 0.048), and higher nADC (p = 0.007) than IDHwt. Between the IDHmut tumors, IDHmut1p/19qdel G3 gliomas had higher nCBV (p = 0.024) and lower nADC (p = 0.002) than IDHmut1p/19qnondel G3 gliomas. Moreover, IDHmut1p/19qdel tumors had the best prognosis and IDHwt tumors had the worst prognosis among G3 gliomas (p < 0.001). PFS was significantly associated with the 95th percentile values of nCBV and nCBF in G3 gliomas. There was no significant difference in neither PFS nor imaging features between IDHwt G3 gliomas and IDHwt GBMs. Conclusion We found significant differences in MRI features, including volumetrics, CBV, and ADC, in G3 gliomas, according to IDH mutation and 1p/19q codeletion status, which can be utilized for the prediction of genomic profiles and the prognosis of G3 glioma patients. The MRI signatures and prognosis of IDHwt G3 gliomas tend to follow those of IDHwt GBMs.

Purpose: Rapid detection of etiologic organisms is crucial for initiating appropriate therapy in patients with central nervous system (CNS) infection. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the BioFire® Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) panel in detecting etiologic organisms in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from febrile infants. Methods: CSF samples from infants aged <90 days who were evaluated for fever were collected between January 2016 and July 2019 at the Seoul National University Children's Hospital. We performed BioFire® ME panel testing of CSF samples that had been used for CSF analysis and conventional tests (bacterial culture, Xpert® enterovirus assay, and herpes simplex virus-1 and -2 polymerase chain reaction) and stored at −70°C until further use. Results: In total, 72 (24 pathogen-identified and 48 pathogen-unidentified) CSF samples were included. Using BioFire® ME panel testing, 41 (85.4%) of the 48 pathogen-unidentified CSF samples yielded negative results and 22 (91.7%) of the 24 pathogen-identified CSF samples yielded the same results (enterovirus in 19, Streptococcus agalactiae in 2, and Streptococcus pneumoniae in 1) as those obtained using the conventional tests, thereby resulting in an overall agreement of 87.5% (63/72). Six of the 7 pathogen-unidentified samples were positive for human parechovirus (HPeV) via BioFire® ME panel testing. Conclusions Compared with the currently available etiologic tests for CNS infection, BioFire® ME panel testing demonstrated a high agreement score for pathogen-identified samples and enabled HPeV detection in young infants. The clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of BioFire® ME panel testing in children must be evaluated for its wider application.