Purpose: Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) has emerged as a promising therapeutic target for CLDN18.2-expressing gastric cancer (GC). We sought to examine the heterogeneity of CLDN18.2 expression between primary GC (PGC) and metastatic GC (MGC) using various scoring methods. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 102 patients with pathologically confirmed paired primary and metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. CLDN18.2 expression was evaluated through immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed CLDN18.2 positivity using multiple scoring approaches, including the immunoreactivity score, H-score, and the percentage of tumor cells showing moderate-to-strong staining intensity. We analyzed the concordance rates between PGC and MGC and the association of CLDN18.2 positivity with clinicopathological features. Results: CLDN18.2 positivity varied from 25% to 65% depending on the scoring method, with PGC consistently showing higher expression levels than MGC. Intratumoral heterogeneity was noted in 25.5% of PGCs and 19.6% of MGCs. Intertumoral heterogeneity, manifesting as discordance in CLDN18.2 positivity between PGC and MGC, was observed in about 20% of cases, with moderate agreement across scoring methods (κ=0.47 to 0.60).In PGC, higher CLDN18.2 positivity correlated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, poorly differentiated grade, and biopsy specimens. In MGC, positivity was associated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, and metastatic peritoneal tissues. Conclusions CLDN18.2 expression demonstrates significant heterogeneity between PGC and MGC, with a 20% discordance rate. Comprehensive tissue sampling and reassessment of CLDN18.2 status are crucial, especially before initiating CLDN18.2-targeted therapies.

Purpose: Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) has emerged as a promising therapeutic target for CLDN18.2-expressing gastric cancer (GC). We sought to examine the heterogeneity of CLDN18.2 expression between primary GC (PGC) and metastatic GC (MGC) using various scoring methods. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 102 patients with pathologically confirmed paired primary and metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. CLDN18.2 expression was evaluated through immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed CLDN18.2 positivity using multiple scoring approaches, including the immunoreactivity score, H-score, and the percentage of tumor cells showing moderate-to-strong staining intensity. We analyzed the concordance rates between PGC and MGC and the association of CLDN18.2 positivity with clinicopathological features. Results: CLDN18.2 positivity varied from 25% to 65% depending on the scoring method, with PGC consistently showing higher expression levels than MGC. Intratumoral heterogeneity was noted in 25.5% of PGCs and 19.6% of MGCs. Intertumoral heterogeneity, manifesting as discordance in CLDN18.2 positivity between PGC and MGC, was observed in about 20% of cases, with moderate agreement across scoring methods (κ=0.47 to 0.60).In PGC, higher CLDN18.2 positivity correlated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, poorly differentiated grade, and biopsy specimens. In MGC, positivity was associated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, and metastatic peritoneal tissues. Conclusions CLDN18.2 expression demonstrates significant heterogeneity between PGC and MGC, with a 20% discordance rate. Comprehensive tissue sampling and reassessment of CLDN18.2 status are crucial, especially before initiating CLDN18.2-targeted therapies.

Purpose: Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) has emerged as a promising therapeutic target for CLDN18.2-expressing gastric cancer (GC). We sought to examine the heterogeneity of CLDN18.2 expression between primary GC (PGC) and metastatic GC (MGC) using various scoring methods. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 102 patients with pathologically confirmed paired primary and metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. CLDN18.2 expression was evaluated through immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed CLDN18.2 positivity using multiple scoring approaches, including the immunoreactivity score, H-score, and the percentage of tumor cells showing moderate-to-strong staining intensity. We analyzed the concordance rates between PGC and MGC and the association of CLDN18.2 positivity with clinicopathological features. Results: CLDN18.2 positivity varied from 25% to 65% depending on the scoring method, with PGC consistently showing higher expression levels than MGC. Intratumoral heterogeneity was noted in 25.5% of PGCs and 19.6% of MGCs. Intertumoral heterogeneity, manifesting as discordance in CLDN18.2 positivity between PGC and MGC, was observed in about 20% of cases, with moderate agreement across scoring methods (κ=0.47 to 0.60).In PGC, higher CLDN18.2 positivity correlated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, poorly differentiated grade, and biopsy specimens. In MGC, positivity was associated with synchronous metastasis, presence of peritoneal metastasis, and metastatic peritoneal tissues. Conclusions CLDN18.2 expression demonstrates significant heterogeneity between PGC and MGC, with a 20% discordance rate. Comprehensive tissue sampling and reassessment of CLDN18.2 status are crucial, especially before initiating CLDN18.2-targeted therapies.

Purpose: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) and hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) are relatively common toxicities that interfere with the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cancer. Anti-inflammatory tripeptide cream (ATPC) is a complex formulation of anti-inflammatory tripeptides, the CD99-agonist Binterin and the Wnt-antagonist Winhibin. The present study aimed to assess the therapeutic effects of ATPC in HFS/HFSR associated with anticancer drugs. Materials and Methods: This was a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients who developed grade 1 HFS/HFSR after systemic anticancer treatments were enrolled, and randomly assigned to receive either ATPC or placebo cream (PC) and followed up at 3-week intervals for up to 9 weeks. Primary endpoint was the development of grade ≥ 2 HFS/HFSR. Results: Between April 2019 and July 2022, 60 patients (31 in the ATPC and 29 in the PC group) completed the study. The incidence of grade ≥ 2 HFS/HFSR was significantly lower in the ATPC than in the PC group (25.8% vs. 51.7%, p=0.039). The ATPC showed trends towards a better QoL score, assessed by a HFSR and QoL questionnaire at 9 weeks (26.0 vs. 29.9, p=0.574), and a lower frequency of discontinuation, interruption, or dose reduction of anticancer drugs (51.6% vs. 58.6%, p=0.586) than the PC group over 9 weeks, though without statistical significance. Conclusion Our results showed that ATPC significantly decreased the development of grade ≥ 2 HFS/HFSR in patients already with HFS/HFSR. Therefore, ATPC may be an effective treatment for HFS/HFSR associated with anticancer drugs.

Background: A decline in masticatory function may indicate brain dysfunction related to dementia, but the relationship between masticatory function and dementia risk remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether masticatory function is associated with the risk of cognitive decline and dementia. Methods: Data were obtained from the nationwide prospective cohort study of randomly sampled community-dwelling Koreans aged ≥ 60 years. The 5,064 non-demented participants, whose number of chewing cycles per bite was assessed by clinical interview, were followed for 8 years with biennial assessments of cognitive performance and clinical diagnoses of all-cause dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Structural brain magnetic resonance imaging was collected from a subset of cohort participants and their spouses for imaging analyses. Results: Males who chewed ≥ 30 cycles/bite had faster decline in global cognition and memory function and were at higher risk for incident all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18–7.18) and AD (HR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.14–9.11) compared to males with less than 10 cycles/bite. Additionally, increased chewing cycles in males were associated with reduced brain volume, particularly in regions involved in compensatory cognitive control of mastication. There was no significant association between chewing cycles and the risk of dementia or brain volume in females. Conclusion Older men who frequently chew their meals could be considered a notable population at risk for dementia who should be carefully assessed for their cognitive trajectories.

Objective: To investigate the relationship between reduced glutathione (GSH), a key molecule of the antioxidant defense system in the blood, and glutathione reductase (GR), which reduces oxidized glutathione (glutathione disulfide [GSSG]) to GSH and maintains the redox balance, with the prevalence of Alzheimer’s dementia and cognitive decline. Methods: In all, 20 participants with Alzheimer’s dementia who completed the third follow-up clinical evaluation over 6 years were selected, and 20 participants with normal cognition were selected after age and sex matching. The GSH and GR concentrations were the independent variables. Clinical diagnosis and neurocognitive test scores were the dependent variables indicating cognitive status. Results: The higher the level of GR, the greater the possibility of having normal cognition than of developing Alzheimer’s dementia. Additionally, the higher the level of GR, the higher the neurocognitive test scores. However, this association was not significant for GSH. After 6 years, the conversion rate from normal cognition to cognitive impairment was significantly higher in the lower 50th percentile of the GR group than in the upper 50th percentile. Conclusion The higher the GR, the lower the prevalence of Alzheimer’s dementia and incidence of cognitive impairment and the higher the cognitive test scores. Therefore, GR is a potential protective biomarker against Alzheimer’s dementia and cognitive decline.

Tolvaptan reduces height-adjusted total kidney volume (htTKV) and renal function decline in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). This study was aimed at investigating the efficacy and safety of tolvaptan in Korean patients with ADPKD during the titration period. Methods: This study is a multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase 4 study. We enrolled 108 patients with ADPKD (age, 19–50 years) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of >30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and factors defined as indicative of rapid disease progression. After tolvaptan titration, we evaluated efficacy and side effects and assessed factors associated with the effects. Results: After titration for 4 weeks, eGFR and htTKV decreased by 6.4 ± 7.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 16 ± 45 mL/m, respectively. No serious adverse drug reactions were observed during the titration period. The greatest eGFR decline was observed in the first week, with a starting tolvaptan dose of 45 mg. Multivariate linear regression for htTKV decline showed that the greater the change in urine osmolality (Uosm), the greater the decrease in htTKV (β, 0.436; p = 0.009) in the 1D group stratified by the Mayo Clinic image classification. Higher baseline eGFR was related to a higher htTKV reduction rate in the 1E group (β, –0.642; p = 0.009). Conclusion: We observed short-term effects and safety during the tolvaptan titration period. The decline of htTKV can be predicted as a short-term effect of tolvaptan by observing Uosm changes from baseline to end of titration in 1D and baseline eGFR in 1E groups.

Background: Accurate measurement of the lower limb alignment is one of the most crucial factors in advanced knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for surgery. Recently, EOS biplanar stereoradiography with three-dimensional reconstruction was developed. The purpose of this study was to compare radiographic parameters between conventional scanography and EOS in patients with advanced knee osteoarthritis who need surgical treatment. Methods: A total of 52 consecutive patients (104 knees) with bilateral knee osteoarthritis of advanced stage (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] grade 3 or 4) were retrospectively reviewed. We measured the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA) on conventional scanograms. In EOS, we measured HKA, hip-knee-shaft angle, mechanical lateral distal femoral angle, and mechanical medial proximal tibial angle. To evaluate sagittal and axial plane alignment, knee flexion angle (KFA), and knee joint rotation (KJR) were also measured. Results: Ninety knees were KL grade 4, and 14 knees were grade 3. The average HKA was 10.14° ± 6.16° on conventional scanograms and 11.26° ± 6.21° in EOS. HKA was greater in EOS than on conventional scanograms, and the difference (1.12°; range, −1.07° to 3.22°) was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Significant correlations were observed on the difference in HKA and mechanical medial proximal tibial angle (r = –0.198, p = 0.044), KFA (r = 0.193, p = 0.049), and KJR (r = 0.290, p = 0.003). In multivariable linear regression analysis, the difference in HKA had significant relationship with KFA (β = 0.286, p = 0.003) and KJR (β = 0.363, p < 0.001). Conclusions HKA measured on conventional scanograms and in EOS differed significantly and the difference had a significant correlations with KFA, KJR, and medial proximal tibial angle. Surgeons can consider these results before orthopedic surgery in patients who have advanced knee osteoarthritis.

Purpose: The Korean Renal Cancer Study Group (KRoCS) provides consensus recommendations on the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CRN) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Materials and Methods: A group of mRCC experts from the Korean Urological Oncology Society convened at the 2021 KRoCS meeting on CRN for mRCC. Results: The consensus document was developed to address 4 questions related that were judged to be the most relevant to patient care: (1) Is there a role for CRN in patients planning targeted therapy? (2) Is there a role for CRN in patients planning immuno-oncology agents? (3) When is the optimal time of CRN in patients planning systemic treatment? (4) What is the ideal patient selection for CRN? The panelists have come up with following consensus. For mRCC patients, CRN should be considered only in those with IMDC (International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) favorable and intermediate risk disease, regardless of the systemic treatment plans. Timing of CRN should consider the risk group as well as the number of risk factors, but is generally recommended for after assessing the degree of response to initial systemic treatment. Patients with good performance status, limited metastatic burden on top of resectable primary tumor are candidates recommended for CRN with or without metastasectomy with priority. Conclusions In conclusion, there is still a role for CRN in the multimodality treatment of mRCC. Careful patient selection is of paramount importance. As the treatment landscape of mRCC continues to change, the role of CRN in the current immuno-oncology era will require more exploration.