Systemic corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of asthma. During acute exacerbation, the short-term use of systemic corticosteroids is recommended. For patients with uncontrolled asthma and severe asthma, long-term and low-dose oral corticosteroids (OCS) have frequently been advocated. However, both short-term and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids carry the risk of adverse events (AEs), including various morbidities and even mortality. Despite recent progress in adult severe asthma management and the availability of new treatment options, the current domestic guidelines for asthma do not provide specific recommendations for oral corticosteroid tapering in patients with severe asthma. Therefore, the task force team of the severe asthma working group in the Korean Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology has proposed a tapering protocol for systemic corticosteroid use in severe asthma. This includes practical recommendations for monitoring OCS-related AE, particularly for adrenal insufficiency and osteoporosis, which suggests corticosteroid-sparing strategies that include alternative therapies, modifying treatable traits, timely specialist assessment, and shared decision-making with patients. However, further real-world research and collaboration with doctors from primary and academic institutes, patients, and policymakers are necessary to establish an OCS stewardship approach. This should include realistic OCS-tapering strategies for patients with severe asthma using regular OCS, education, and campaigns for patients, the public, and healthcare providers about the burden of severe asthma, as well as improving timely access to specialized severe asthma services for optimal management.

Purpose: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been an important method of treatment in the advance of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The indications for HSCT are evolving and require updated establishment. In this study, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of HSCT on the treatment outcome of pediatric ALL, considering the indications for HSCT and subgroups. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on ALL patients diagnosed and treated at a single center. Risk groups were categorized based on age at diagnosis, initial white blood cell count, disease lineage (B/T), and cytogenetic study results. Data on the patients’ disease status at HSCT and indications of HSCT were collected. Indications for HSCT were categorized as upfront HSCT at 1st complete remission, relapse, and refractory disease. Results: Among the 549 screened patients, a total of 418 patients were included in the study; B-cell ALL (n=379) and T-cell ALL (T-ALL) (n=39). HSCT was conducted on a total of 106 patients (25.4%), with a higher frequency as upfront HSCT in higher-risk groups and specific cytogenetics. The overall survival (OS) was significantly better when done upfront than in relapsed or refractory state in T-ALL patients (p=0.002). The KMT2A-rearranged ALL patients showed superior event-free survival (p=0.002) and OS (p=0.022) when HSCT was done as upfront treatment. Conclusion HSCT had a substantial positive effect in a specific subset of pediatric ALL. In particular, frontline HSCT for T-ALL and KMT2A-rearranged ALL offered a better prognosis than when HSCT was conducted in a relapsed or refractory setting.

Purpose: There are limited data regarding changes in glucose control in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to evaluate changes in the metrics of a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system during COVID-19 infection in children and adolescents with T1D. Methods: Eighteen patients with T1D (<18 years of age) were included in this retrospective study. The effects of COVID-19 on CGM metrics were assessed at 5 time points (2 weeks before COVID-19 [time 1], 1 week before COVID-19 [time 2], during COVID-19 [time 3], 1 week after COVID-19 [time 4], and 2 weeks after COVID-19 [time 5]). Results: All participants had at least 1 symptom of COVID-19 and did not need to be hospitalized. The glucose management indicator (GMI) was higher at time 3 (7.7%±1.4%) compared to time 1 (7.1%±1.1%; P=0.016) and time 5 (7.0%±1.2%; P=0.008). According to the insulin delivery method, the GMI at time 3 was significantly higher than that at time 5 in patients treated with multiple daily injections (MDI) (median and interquartile range, 8.0% [6.1%–8.5%] vs. 7.1% [5.8%–7.9%]; P=0.020) but not in those treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Conclusion Pediatric patients with T1D and mild COVID-19 showed worsening glycemic control during COVID-19 infection, but it returned to preinfection levels within 2 weeks of infection. CSII is more effective in maintaining stable glycemic control during COVID-19 infection than is MDI therapy.

Background: An ideal lung allocation system should reduce waiting list deaths, improve transplant survival, and ensure equitable organ allocation. This study aimed to develop a novel lung allocation score (LAS) system, the MaxBenefit LAS, to maximize transplant benefits. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed data from the Korean Network for Organ Sharing database, including 1,599 lung transplant candidates between September 2009 and December 2020. We developed the MaxBenefit LAS, combining a waitlist mortality model and a post-transplant survival model using elastic-net Cox regression, was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) values and Uno’s C-index. Its performance was compared to the US LAS in an independent cohort. Results: The waitlist mortality model showed strong predictive performance with AUC values of 0.834 and 0.818 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. The post-transplant survival model also demonstrated good predictive ability (AUC: 0.708 and 0.685). The MaxBenefit LAS effectively stratified patients by risk, with higher scores correlating with increased waitlist mortality and decreased post-transplant mortality. The MaxBenefit LAS outperformed the conventional LAS in predicting waitlist death and identifying candidates with higher transplant benefits. Conclusion The MaxBenefit LAS offers a promising approach to optimizing lung allocation by balancing the urgency of candidates with their likelihood of survival post-transplant. This novel system has the potential to improve outcomes for lung transplant recipients and reduce waitlist mortality, providing a more equitable allocation of donor lungs.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes and current status of reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (RLDG) compared with multiport laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (MLDG) based on a 2019 nationwide survey of surgical gastric cancer treatments by the Korean Gastric Cancer Association (KGCA). Materials and Methods: The study was conducted retrospectively from March to December 2020 using data from the 2019 KGCA nationwide survey database. To compare RLDG and MLDG based on age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, histological type, tumor invasion, and lymph node metastasis, propensity score matching was performed. Results: Of the 14,076 registered patients with gastric cancer, the five-port approach was the most favored for multiport gastrectomy, accounting for 6,396 (70.9%) cases, followed by the four-port approach, with 1,462 (16.2%) cases. The single-port approach was used in 303 (3.4%) cases, the two-port approach in 95 (1.1%) cases, and the three-port approach in 731 (8.1%) cases. RLDG was performed in 805 patients (6.4%), MLDG was conducted in 4,831 patients (34.3%), and 804 patients were 1:1 matched in each group. The average operation time was shorter in the RLDG (168.2±49.1 min vs. 179.5±61.5 min, P<0.001). No significant difference was found in blood loss (84.8±115.9 cc vs. 75.5±119.6 cc, P=0.152), overall complication rates (11.3% vs. 13.1%, P=0.254), or complications ≥ to grade IIIa (3.2% vs. 4.4%, P=0.240). Conclusions This study revealed that RLDG is a safe and effective surgical option for gastric cancer with the potential to offer shorter operation times without increasing the risk of complications.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Lecanemab and donanemab have received full U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, and subsequently, lecanemab has been approved by the Korean FDA and it has recently entered commercial use in Korea. This has increased interest in anti-amyloid immunotherapy for Alzheimer’s disease. Anti-amyloid immunotherapy has shown potential to modify the progression of the disease by specifically binding to amyloid β, a key pathological product in Alzheimer’s disease, and eliminating accumulated amyloid plaques in the brain. However, this treatment can be accompanied by a side-effect, amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), which requires periodic monitoring by MRI. It is crucial to detect ARIA and accurately assess the severity by radiology. The role of the radiologist is important in this context, requiring proficiency in basic knowledge of ARIA, and in diagnosing/evaluating ARIA. This review aims to comprehensively cover aspects of ARIA, including its definition, pathophysiology, incidence, risk factors, assessment of severity by radiology, differential diagnosis, and management.

Purpose: To report five cases of macular hole (MH) coexisting with uveal melanoma (UM) and review the literature. Methods: Seventeen patients (5 new and 12 from previous reports) with coexisting MH and UM were reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether the MH was diagnosed before or after tumor treatment. The clinical features, pathogenesis, management options, and clinical outcomes were reviewed. Results: Of 505 patients with UM in our institution, 5 (1.0%) had a concurrent MH in the ipsilateral eye. The 17 patients reviewed had a mean age of 63.9 years at the time of MH diagnosis. Of 16 patients with available data on sex, 11 (64.7%) were female. There were no major differences in the demographic or clinical data of the groups. Of the 15 known tumor locations, 6 (35.3%) were juxtapapillary or macular. In patients who developed MH after UM treatment, the durations from tumor treatment (radiotherapy or transpupillary thermotherapy) to MH diagnosis were 3 to 56 months (median, 8.5 months). MH surgery was performed in nine eyes, and hole closure was achieved in seven eyes with postoperative data. The mean visual acuity showed a tendency of improvement after surgery. No intraocular or extraocular tumor dissemination associated with surgery was observed. Conclusions MH is observed in approximately 1% of patients with UM, either before or after tumor treatment. Of patients with coexisting MH and UM, MH surgery appears to be safe and effective in those with stable tumors and visual potential.