No abstract available.
Methotrexate* ; Psoriasis*

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease. In the treatment of psoriasis, cyclosporine is commonly prescribed systemic agents. However, long-term use of cyclosporine is not recommended because of side effects such as nephrotoxicity or hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the improved safety of rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate, we investigated the frequency of abnormal results in laboratory test after long term rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate. METHODS: From January 2009 to June 2014, patients who were treated with cyclosporine or methotrexate were enrolled. The clinical data and usage of medications were reviewed. Laboratory tests were conducted before starting the treatment and regularly follow-up. The occurrences of any laboratory abnormalities during the treatments were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 21 psoriatic patients were enrolled. The mean of medication period and cumulative dose of cyclosporine and methotrexate were 497.81±512.06 days and 115.68±184.34 g in cyclosporine and 264.19±264.71 days and 448.71±448.63 mg in methotrexate. Laboratory abnormalities were found in total two patients after rotational therapy: two patients (9.5%) in aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase and one patient (4.8%) in uric acid. No laboratory abnormalities were found in renal function test. CONCLUSION: We found that the rotational approaches using cyclosporine and methotrexate reduced the possibility of the development of nephrotoxicity. In addition to other advantage such as quick switching from one agent to another, the rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate can minimize the adverse events during the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis.
Aspartic Acid ; Clinical Chemistry Tests ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Cyclosporine* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Methotrexate* ; Psoriasis* ; Uric Acid

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease. In the treatment of psoriasis, cyclosporine is commonly prescribed systemic agents. However, long-term use of cyclosporine is not recommended because of side effects such as nephrotoxicity or hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the improved safety of rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate, we investigated the frequency of abnormal results in laboratory test after long term rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate. METHODS: From January 2009 to June 2014, patients who were treated with cyclosporine or methotrexate were enrolled. The clinical data and usage of medications were reviewed. Laboratory tests were conducted before starting the treatment and regularly follow-up. The occurrences of any laboratory abnormalities during the treatments were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 21 psoriatic patients were enrolled. The mean of medication period and cumulative dose of cyclosporine and methotrexate were 497.81±512.06 days and 115.68±184.34 g in cyclosporine and 264.19±264.71 days and 448.71±448.63 mg in methotrexate. Laboratory abnormalities were found in total two patients after rotational therapy: two patients (9.5%) in aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase and one patient (4.8%) in uric acid. No laboratory abnormalities were found in renal function test. CONCLUSION: We found that the rotational approaches using cyclosporine and methotrexate reduced the possibility of the development of nephrotoxicity. In addition to other advantage such as quick switching from one agent to another, the rotational therapy using cyclosporine and methotrexate can minimize the adverse events during the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis.
Aspartic Acid ; Clinical Chemistry Tests ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Cyclosporine* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Methotrexate* ; Psoriasis* ; Uric Acid

Apert syndrome is a rare genetic disorder characterized by malformations of the skull, face, hands, and feet. We report a case of severe hyperhidrosis in a 13-month-old female infant with Apert syndrome who was born with craniosynostosis, midface hypoplasia, and syndactyly of both hands. She had a history of excessive sweating since birth and this was confirmed using the iodine-starch test. Hyperhidrosis was first reported as a key cutaneous manifestation of Apert syndrome in 1993. However, the main focus in the field of dermatology is on antibiotic-refractory acne, which serves as another cutaneous hallmark of the disease. This is the first report in the Korean literature that describes hyperhidrosis in Apert syndrome. We highlight the presentation of hyperhidrosis as a key cutaneous manifestation in Apert syndrome.
Acne Vulgaris ; Acrocephalosyndactylia ; Craniosynostoses ; Dermatology ; Female ; Foot ; Hand ; Humans ; Hyperhidrosis ; Infant ; Parturition ; Skull ; Sweat ; Sweating ; Syndactyly

Over the last two decades, several tissue clearing methodologies have been established that render tissues optically transparent and allow imaging of unsectioned tissues of significant volumes, thus improving the capacity to study the relationships between cell and 3D tissue architecture. Despite these technical advances, the important unsolved challenges that these methods face include complexity, time, consistency of tissue size before and after clearing, and ability to immunolabel various antibodies in cleared tissue. Here, we established very simple and fast tissue clearing protocol, FxClear, which involves acrylamide-free electrophoretic tissue clearing (ETC). By removal of the acrylamide infusion step, we were able to achieve fast reaction time, smaller tissue expansion, and higher immunoreactivity. Especially, immunoreactivity and fluorescence intensity were increased in FxClear-processed tissues compared to un-cleared tissues. Our protocol may be suitable for small-sized biopsy samples for 3D pathological examinations.
Acrylamide ; Antibodies ; Biopsy ; Fluorescence ; Immunohistochemistry ; Methods ; Reaction Time ; Tissue Engineering ; Tissue Expansion

Alcohol dependence is a serious disorder that can be related with a number of potential health-related and social consequences. Cortical thickness measurements would provide important information on the cortical structural alterations in patients with alcohol dependence. Twenty-one patients with alcohol dependence and 22 healthy comparison subjects have been recruited and underwent high-resolution brain magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and clinical assessments. T1-weighted MR images were analyzed using the cortical thickness analysis program. Significantly thinner cortical thickness in patients with alcohol dependence than healthy comparison subjects was noted in the left superior frontal cortical region, correcting for multiple comparisons and adjusting with age and hemispheric average cortical thickness. There was a significant association between thickness in the cluster of the left superior frontal cortex and the duration of alcohol use. The prefrontal cortical region may particularly be vulnerable to chronic alcohol exposure. It is also possible that the pre-existing deficit in this region may have rendered individuals more susceptible to alcohol dependence.
Alcoholism ; Brain ; Cerebral Cortex ; Frontal Lobe ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.