PURPOSE: We wanted to objectively evaluate the anatomy of the neonatal brain on ultrasound images, and so we reconstructed several oblique magnetic resonance images that corresponded with the oblique ultrasound images by using MRI and a multiplanar reconstruction program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRI 3D-SPGR axial scans of the brain were performed for two neonates and then we obtained the reconstructed MR images that were parallel with the direction of the sonographic oblique scanning plane. We made the anatomic models of the neonatal cranial ultrasound images by using axial MRI as the standard reference on the same screen. RESULTS: We created an anatomic atlas, with the representative six oblique coronal scans and six oblique sagittal scans that corresponded to the neonatal brain ultrasound images. CONCLUSION: This objective anatomic research with using MRI and a multiplanar reconstruction program for creating the ultrasound oblique brain images of a neonate will be very helpful for evaluating the ultrasonographic anatomy and to apply it to clinical practice.
Brain ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy ; Models, Anatomic

The Kallmanns syndrome is the most common form of isolated hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in which anosmia or hyposmia resulting from agenesis of hypoplasia of the olfactory lobes is associated with LHRH deficiency, This syndrome is genetically heterogeneous and can be trans-mitted as an X-linked, autosomal dominant or autosomal recessive trait. The hypogonadotropic hypogonadism results in absent or incomplete pubertal development and may be associated with anosmia or hyposmia, mid-line defect(color blindness, cleft-lip or
Blindness ; Cryptorchidism ; Epiphyses ; Femur Neck ; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone ; Growth Plate ; Head ; Humans ; Hypogonadism ; Kallmann Syndrome ; Male ; Olfaction Disorders ; Olfactory Cortex ; Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphyses

PURPOSE: Features of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in osteosarcoma and in vitro efficacies of EGFR inhibitors against osteosarcoma cells were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty biopsy samples of osteosarcoma patients were retrospectively analyzed for EGFR protein expression by immunohistochemistry. Relationships between EGFR expression and clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment outcomes were evaluated. Four osteosarcoma cell lines were analyzed for EGFR and p-EGFR expression by western blotting. Efficacies of gefitinib and BIBW2992 on osteosarcoma cells were evaluated using a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay. Tyrosine kinase domains in exons 18 to 21 were sequenced and gene expression analyses of EGFR and PTEN were performed in four osteosarcoma cell lines. RESULTS: EGFR protein was expressed in 27 (90%) samples (6 low, 12 intermediate, 9 high) and in three cell lines. Intermediate or high staining for EGFR was related to a tumor volume<150 mL (p<0.001) and histologic subtype other than osteoblastic type (p=0.03). However, EGFR expression was not associated with histologic response to preoperative chemotherapy or survival. Gefitinib and BIBW 2992 did not have any significant inhibitory effect on cell viabilities. DNA sequencing analysis revealed three osteosarcoma cell lines have single base changes at codon 2361 of exon 20 (G to A), without affecting translation results. Furthermore, no mutation was found to be associated with constitutive EGFR activation. CONCLUSION: In the present study, gefitinib and BIBW2992 were not effective against osteosarcoma cells. However, as osteosarcoma cells express EGFR, further studies are necessary to explore the potential of other therapeutic agents targeting EGFR.
Biopsy ; Blotting, Western ; Cell Line ; Cell Survival ; Codon ; Epidermal Growth Factor ; Exons ; Gene Expression ; Humans ; Immunohistochemistry ; Osteoblasts ; Osteosarcoma ; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases ; Quinazolines ; Receptor, Epidermal Growth Factor ; Retrospective Studies ; Sequence Analysis, DNA ; Tetrazolium Salts ; Thiazoles

Objective: To investigate the therapeutic efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as consolidation treatment after completing first-line treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients treated at the Comprehensive Gynecologic Cancer Center between January 2014 and 2019. Based on the inclusion criteria, 24 eligible patients who received HIPEC (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, for 90 minutes, at 42°C) (HIPEC group) as consolidation treatment after terminating the adjuvant chemotherapy were identified. Another 24 patients who met the inclusion criteria and did not receive HIPEC were matched, representing the non-HIPEC group. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were examined between the two groups. Results: The median DFS was 28.7 and 24.2 months in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups, respectively (P=0.688). The 3-year DFS rates in the HIPEC and non-HPEC groups were 39.5% and 32.6%, respectively. However, the median OS was not determined. The 5-year OS rates in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups were 86.2% and 81.3%, respectively (P=0.850). One patient developed grade 3 neutropenia. Other patients experienced mild adverse events after HIPEC. Conclusion This study suggests that consolidation HIPEC could not support the survival benefit after completing the first-line treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, although no severe specific safety issues were found. Therefore, randomized trials evaluating consolidation HIPEC for the management of ovarian cancer are warranted.

Objective: To investigate the therapeutic efficacy of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as consolidation treatment after completing first-line treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients treated at the Comprehensive Gynecologic Cancer Center between January 2014 and 2019. Based on the inclusion criteria, 24 eligible patients who received HIPEC (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, for 90 minutes, at 42°C) (HIPEC group) as consolidation treatment after terminating the adjuvant chemotherapy were identified. Another 24 patients who met the inclusion criteria and did not receive HIPEC were matched, representing the non-HIPEC group. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were examined between the two groups. Results: The median DFS was 28.7 and 24.2 months in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups, respectively (P=0.688). The 3-year DFS rates in the HIPEC and non-HPEC groups were 39.5% and 32.6%, respectively. However, the median OS was not determined. The 5-year OS rates in the HIPEC and non-HIPEC groups were 86.2% and 81.3%, respectively (P=0.850). One patient developed grade 3 neutropenia. Other patients experienced mild adverse events after HIPEC. Conclusion This study suggests that consolidation HIPEC could not support the survival benefit after completing the first-line treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, although no severe specific safety issues were found. Therefore, randomized trials evaluating consolidation HIPEC for the management of ovarian cancer are warranted.