Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Purpose: This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients. Materials and Methods: We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories. Results: Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both). Conclusion Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.

Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

Objective: To assess the success rate and proximity of miniscrews to the root using surgical guides produced by integrating data obtained from conebeam computed tomography and intraoral scanned models. Methods: This retrospective study involved 113 patients (224 miniscrews) who underwent miniscrew placement as part of their orthodontic treatment. Two operators placed miniscrews between the buccal alveolar bone of each patient and assessed initial stability by measuring the Periotest value (PTV) and insertion torque (IT). Patients were divided into two groups based on the miniscrew insertion method: manual group (MG) and surgical guide group (SG). Root proximity was assessed using periapical radiography, and miniscrews that remained in place for over 6 months were considered successful. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the Kaplan–Meier survival curves between the groups (P < 0.05). The success rates of the miniscrews were 79.1% and 90.5% for the MG and SG, respectively (P < 0.05). The root contact rate also differed significantly between the groups (MG, 17.5%; SG, 0.1%; P < 0.001). However, the PTV and IT did not show significant differences between the groups. Conclusions Proximity to the root and utilization of surgical guides have the most direct impact on the success rate of miniscrews. Root proximity can be effectively reduced using surgical guides. Therefore, the use of a miniscrew surgical guide is recommended to increase the success rate of miniscrews as stable anchorage devices, particularly in cases with narrow interradicular space.

Background: Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as a viable management strategy for low-risk papillary thyroid microcarcinoma (PTMC), following pioneering trials at Kuma Hospital and the Cancer Institute Hospital in Japan. Numerous prospective cohort studies have since validated AS as a management option for low-risk PTMC, leading to its inclusion in thyroid cancer guidelines across various countries. From 2016 to 2020, the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Active Surveillance on Papillary Thyroid Microcarcinoma (MAeSTro) enrolled 1,177 patients, providing comprehensive data on PTMC progression, sonographic predictors of progression, quality of life, surgical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness when comparing AS to immediate surgery. The second phase of MAeSTro (MAeSTro-EXP) expands AS to low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) tumors larger than 1 cm, driven by the hypothesis that overall risk assessment outweighs absolute tumor size in surgical decision-making. Methods: This protocol aims to address whether limiting AS to tumors smaller than 1 cm may result in unnecessary surgeries for low-risk PTCs detected during their rapid initial growth phase. By expanding the AS criteria to include tumors up to 1.5 cm, while simultaneously refining and standardizing the criteria for risk assessment and disease progression, we aim to minimize overtreatment and maintain rigorous monitoring to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion This study will contribute to optimizing AS guidelines and enhance our understanding of the natural course and appropriate management of low-risk PTCs. Additionally, MAeSTro-EXP involves a multinational collaboration between South Korea and Australia. This cross-country study aims to identify cultural and racial differences in the management of low-risk PTC, thereby enriching the global understanding of AS practices and their applicability across diverse populations.

Purpose: This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients. Materials and Methods: We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories. Results: Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both). Conclusion Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.

Purpose: This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients. Materials and Methods: We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories. Results: Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both). Conclusion Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.