Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a shortage of medical resources and the need for proper treatment guidelines for brain tumor patients became more pressing. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. As part II of the guideline, this consensus survey is to suggest management options in specific clinical scenarios during the crisis period. Methods: The KSNO Guideline Working Group consisted of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to confirm a consensus reached by the experts, opinions on 5 specific clinical scenarios about the management of brain tumor patients during the crisis period were devised and asked. To build-up the consensus process, Delphi method was employed. Results: The summary of the final consensus from each scenario are as follows. For patients with newly diagnosed astrocytoma with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant and oligodendroglioma with IDH-mutant/1p19q codeleted, observation was preferred for patients with low-risk, World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) ≥60, while adjuvant radiotherapy alone was preferred for patients with high-risk, WHO grade 2, and KPS ≥60. For newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma, the most preferred adjuvant treatment strategy after surgery was radiotherapy plus temozolomide except for patients aged ≥70 years with KPS of 60 and unmethylated MGMT promoters. In patients with symptomatic brain metastasis, the preferred treatment differed according to the number of brain metastasis and performance status. For patients with newly diagnosed atypical meningioma, adjuvant radiation was deferred in patients with older age, poor performance status, complete resection, or low mitotic count. Conclusion It is imperative that proper medical care for brain tumor patients be sustained and provided, even during the crisis period. The findings of this consensus survey will be a useful reference in determining appropriate treatment options for brain tumor patients in the specific clinical scenarios covered by the survey during the future crisis.

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the need for appropriate treatment guidelines for patients with brain tumors was indispensable due to the lack and limitations of medical resources. Thus, the Korean Society for Neuro-Oncology (KSNO), a multidisciplinary academic society, has undertaken efforts to develop a guideline that is tailored to the domestic situation and that can be used in similar crisis situations in the future. Methods: The KSNO Guideline Working Group was composed of 22 multidisciplinary experts on neuro-oncology in Korea. In order to reach consensus among the experts, the Delphi method was used to build up the final recommendations. Results: All participating experts completed the series of surveys, and the results of final survey were used to draft the current consensus recommendations. Priority levels of surgery and radiotherapy during crises were proposed using appropriate time window-based criteria for management outcome. The highest priority for surgery is assigned to patients who are life-threatening or have a risk of significant impact on a patient’s prognosis unless immediate intervention is given within 24–48 hours. As for the radiotherapy, patients who are at risk of compromising their overall survival or neurological status within 4–6 weeks are assigned to the highest priority. Curative-intent chemotherapy has the highest priority, followed by neoadjuvant/adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy during a crisis period. Telemedicine should be actively considered as a management tool for brain tumor patients during the mass infection crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion It is crucial that adequate medical care for patients with brain tumors is maintained and provided, even during times of crisis. This guideline will serve as a valuable resource, assisting in the delivery of treatment to brain tumor patients in the event of any future crisis.

Background/Aims: This study aimed to investigate the perceptions and behaviors of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the major epidemic area in Korea. Methods: Between April and May 2020, a cross-sectional survey was performed at two tertiary hospitals in Daegu, South Korea, on patients’ experiences, coping strategies and perceptions. Results: Most of the 544 patients participating in the survey strictly adhered to personal protection guidance against COVID-19. In the early COVID-19 crisis, many patients canceled or postponed hospital visits (57.5%) and rescheduled biologics administrations (26.4%). Although 13.6% utilized telemedicine, the frequency of individuals leaving their homes remained unchanged. Although 50.4% were concerned about their susceptibility to COVID-19, 72.2% adhered to their treatment for IBD. In patients taking biologics or Janus kinase inhibitors, 86.8% disagreed that they should discontinue their medication as a preventative measure against COVID-19, but 21.9% actually discontinued their medications. Of those with discordance between the perception of IBD drug adherence and active behaviors, 5.4% of all and 39.4% of biologics or Janus kinase inhibitors withheld drugs specifically due to fear of COVID-19. Only 7% of all patients discussed drug safety with their physicians. The level of concern for COVID-19 depended on the type of drug used. Conclusions Patients with IBD showed concerns about the increased risk of COVID-19 due to IBD or their medications, and a considerable number of patients withheld their medications without consulting medical staff. Enhanced active communications with patients with IBD and appropriate health-related education should be provided.

Background/Aims: The efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma has been evaluated in a global clinical trial programme. This post hoc analysis assesses the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab in Korean patients. Methods: Data from Korean patients in the Phase III, placebo-controlled, randomised DREAM (MEA112997/NCT01000506) and MENSA (MEA115588/ NCT01691521) studies were included. Patients ≥ 12 years old with severe eosinophilic asthma received mepolizumab (DREAM: 75, 250 or 750 mg intravenously [IV]; MENSA: 75 mg IV or 100 mg subcutaneously [SC]), or placebo every 4 weeks for 52 weeks (DREAM) or 32 weeks (MENSA). The primary outcome was the rate of clinically significant asthma exacerbations. Secondary outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores (MENSA only). Blood eosinophil counts (BEC) and safety were assessed throughout. Results: Reductions in the rate of clinically significant asthma exacerbations were observed with the approved (100 mg SC) and bioequivalent (75 mg IV) doses of mepolizumab in Korean patients who participated in DREAM and MENSA. In MENSA, trends for improvements from baseline at week 32 in pre-bronchodilator FEV1 (75 mg IV group), ACQ-5 and SGRQ scores (in both treatment groups) were seen versus placebo in Korean patients. Incidence of on-treatment adverse events was similar in Korean patients versus non-Korean patients as were observed reductions from baseline in BEC. Conclusions Mepolizumab treatment provided clinical benefits for Korean patients with severe eosinophilic asthma; the safety profile is consistent with the overall population.

Purpose: High incidence of osteoporosis has been reported in breast cancer patients due to early menopause triggered by adjuvant treatment and temporary ovarian function suppression. In this study, we sought to determine whether long-term breast cancer survivors had an elevated risk of low bone density compared to the general population. Methods: Long-term breast cancer survivors who had been treated for more than 5 years were selected for this study. Data were obtained from medical records and using a questionnaire from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). An agematched non-cancer control group was selected from the KNHANES records. Incidence of fracture and bone mineral density (BMD) were compared between the two groups. Results: In total, 74 long-term breast cancer survivors and 296 non-cancer controls were evaluated. The incidence of fracture did not differ between the two groups (P=0.130). No differences were detected in lumbar BMD (P=0.051) following adjustment for body mass index, while hip BMD was significantly lower in breast cancer survivors (P=0.028). Chemotherapy and endocrine treatment were not related to low BMD in breast cancer survivors. In more than half of the survivors, the 10-year risk of osteoporotic fracture was less than 1%. Conclusion Long-term breast cancer survivors had low bone density but a comparable risk of fracture compared to non-cancer agematched controls. Further studies on the factors related to low bone density in long-term breast cancer survivors are required.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The use of a low-volume bowel cleansing agent is associated with a greater willingness to undergo repeat colonoscopy. Oral sulfate solution (OSS) is a recently approved low-volume agent; however, its efficacy and safety in the elderly population remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of the OSS preparation, in comparison to those of a standard polyethylene glycol (PEG; 4 L) preparation, in elderly patients. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, investigator-blinded study was conducted. Participants were randomized to receive OSS or 4-L PEG with a split-dose regimen. Bowel cleansing efficacy was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Acceptance, satisfaction, and preparation-related symptoms were recorded. Additionally, blood parameters were analyzed for electrolyte abnormalities and nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients were analyzed. No group differences in overall bowel cleansing efficacy were observed, with “adequate” preparations achieved in 95.9% (93/97) and 94.8% (91/96) of patients in the OSS and 4L PEG groups, respectively (p=0.747). However, mean BBPS scores for the entire (p=0.010) and right colon (p=0.001) were significantly higher in the OSS group than in the 4-L PEG group. The severity of clinical adverse events and frequency of acute kidney injury were similarly low, and no clinically meaningful electrolyte changes were identified. Self-reported scores regarding amount (p<0.001) and feeling (p=0.007), as well as overall satisfaction (p=0.001) and willingness to repeat the preparation (92.8% vs 67.7%, p<0.001), were significantly better in the OSS group than in the 4-L PEG group. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly individuals, OSS with a split-dose regimen has greater acceptability and comparable efficacy in bowel cleansing compared to 4-L PEG. (Clinical trials registration number: NCT03112967)
Acute Kidney Injury ; Aged ; Cathartics ; Colon ; Colonoscopy ; Detergents ; Humans ; Polyethylene Glycols ; Treatment Outcome

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are no data comparing clinical outcomes of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between biodegradable polymer-biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer-everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BP-BES compared with DP-EES in patients undergoing complex PCI. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the SMART-DESK registry were stratified into 2 categories based on the complexity of PCI. Complex PCI was defined as having at least one of the following features: unprotected left main lesion, ≥2 lesions treated, total stent length >40 mm, minimal stent diameter ≤2.5 mm, or bifurcation as target lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 1,999 patients, 1,145 (57.3%) underwent complex PCI: 521 patients were treated with BP-BES and 624 with DP-EES. In propensity-score matching analysis (481 pairs), the risks of TLF (3.8% vs. 5.2%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.578; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.246–1.359; p=0.209), cardiac death (2.5% vs. 2.5%, adjusted HR, 0.787; 95% CI, 0.244–2.539; p=0.689), TV-MI (0.5% vs. 0.4%, adjusted HR, 1.128; 95% CI, 0.157–8.093; p=0.905), and TLR (1.1% vs. 2.9%, adjusted HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.139–1.095; p=0.074) did not differ between 2 stent groups after complex PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes of BP-BES were comparable to those of DP-EES at 2 years after complex PCI. Our data suggest that use of BP-BES is acceptable, even for complex PCI.
Coronary Artery Disease ; Death ; Drug-Eluting Stents ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Myocardial Infarction ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ; Stents

BACKGROUND: Since December 15 2017, donors showing a non-discriminated reactive (NDR) result in the nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) have been temporarily deferred and anti-HBc and anti-HBs assays as additional tests were performed. Donors with an anti-HBc reactive result and less than 100 IU/L of anti-HBs could not be released and can request a reentry test after more than six months. This study considered the effects of additional tests for NDR donors by analyzing the reentry test results in donors not released in the additional test. METHODS: This study examined the results of the additional test for NDR donors from January 2017 to September 2018 and the reentry test of the donors not released in the additional test. RESULTS: NAT was conducted on 4,706,051 blood donors over the period and 2,545 (0.05%) of them showed NDR. A total of 656 (25.8%) of the NDR donors were not released in the additional test. Among them, 246 donors requested a reentry test; 222 (90.2%) donors were not reentered, and 23 (10.4%) showed HBV NAT reactive results in the reentry test. Among the remaining 24 reentered donors, 2 donors (8.3%) showed anti-HBc nonreactive results in the reentry test and 22 donors (91.7%) showed higher than 100 IU/L of anti-HBs. CONCLUSION: The follow-up of NDR donors may be significant because some donors showed different results between screening test and reentry test. In addition the effectiveness of the introduction of additional tests for the NDR donors has been proved to be effective.
Blood Donors ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Mass Screening ; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques ; Tissue Donors

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are no data comparing clinical outcomes of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between biodegradable polymer-biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer-everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES). We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BP-BES compared with DP-EES in patients undergoing complex PCI. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the SMART-DESK registry were stratified into 2 categories based on the complexity of PCI. Complex PCI was defined as having at least one of the following features: unprotected left main lesion, ≥2 lesions treated, total stent length >40 mm, minimal stent diameter ≤2.5 mm, or bifurcation as target lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 1,999 patients, 1,145 (57.3%) underwent complex PCI: 521 patients were treated with BP-BES and 624 with DP-EES. In propensity-score matching analysis (481 pairs), the risks of TLF (3.8% vs. 5.2%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.578; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.246–1.359; p=0.209), cardiac death (2.5% vs. 2.5%, adjusted HR, 0.787; 95% CI, 0.244–2.539; p=0.689), TV-MI (0.5% vs. 0.4%, adjusted HR, 1.128; 95% CI, 0.157–8.093; p=0.905), and TLR (1.1% vs. 2.9%, adjusted HR, 0.390; 95% CI, 0.139–1.095; p=0.074) did not differ between 2 stent groups after complex PCI. CONCLUSIONS Clinical outcomes of BP-BES were comparable to those of DP-EES at 2 years after complex PCI. Our data suggest that use of BP-BES is acceptable, even for complex PCI.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A risk prediction is needed even in the contemporary era of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to develop a risk scoring specific for patients with AMI being treated with guideline-adherent optimal therapies, including percutaneous coronary intervention and all 5 medications (aspirin, thienopyridine, β-blocker, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, and statin). METHODS: From registries, 12,174 AMI patients were evaluated. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause death or AMI. The Korea Working Group in Myocardial Infarction (KorMI) system was compared with the Assessment of Pexelizumab in Acute Myocardial Infarction (APEX AMI), Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications (CADILLAC), and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events scores (GRACE) models. RESULTS: Ten predictors were identified: left ventricular dysfunction (hazard ratio [HR], 2.3), bare-metal stent (HR, 2.0), Killip class ≥II (HR, 1.9), renal insufficiency (HR, 1.8), previous stroke (HR, 1.6), regional wall-motion- score >20 on echocardiography (HR, 1.5), body mass index ≤24 kg/m2 (HR, 1.4), age ≥70 years (HR, 1.4), prior coronary heart disease (HR, 1.4), and diabetes (HR, 1.4). Compared with the previous models, the KorMI system had good discrimination (time-dependent C statistic, 0.759) and showed reasonable goodness-of-fit by Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p=0.84). Moreover, the continuous-net reclassification improvement varied from −27.3% to −19.1%, the integrated discrimination index varied from −2.1% to −0.9%, and the median improvement in risk score was from −1.0% to −0.4%. CONCLUSIONS: The KorMI system would be a useful tool for predicting outcomes in survivors treated with guideline-adherent optimal therapies after AMI.
Angioplasty ; Angiotensins ; Body Mass Index ; Coronary Disease ; Discrimination (Psychology) ; Drug Therapy ; Echocardiography ; Humans ; Korea ; Myocardial Infarction ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ; Registries ; Renal Insufficiency ; Stents ; Stroke ; Survivors ; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left