Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncologic outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE) using a clustered electrode in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Materials and Methods: In this single-center prospective cohort study, 13 patients with LAPC (median age, 60 years; range, 48–78 years) underwent clustered electrode IRE between September 2022 and September 2024. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Endpoints included technical success, procedure-related complications, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Tumors were located in the pancreatic head in four patients (30.8%) and in the body/tail in nine (69.2%). The median tumor size was 2.4 cm (1.5–4.0 cm), and vascular invasion was present in all patients. Technical success was achieved in all patients. Intraoperative IRE was performed in 11 (84.6%) patients, and 2 (15.4%) patients underwent percutaneous IRE. Gastrointestinal bleeding events as major complications occurred in two patients (15.4%) and, both were successfully controlled by embolization. No 60-day mortality was observed. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months (range, 9.9–33.4 months) after IRE, median OS and PFS from IRE were 20.1 and 14.5 months, respectively. Conclusion IRE using clustered electrodes for LAPC appears to be a feasible therapeutic approach, offering reliable technical success and acceptable safety. Survival outcomes are encouraging; however, larger, controlled studies are required.

Purpose: Non-operative management (NOM) has emerged as a promising organ-preserving strategy for patients with rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). However, no standardized treatment protocol has been established for watch-and-wait strategies. Materials and Methods: This prospective study evaluated oncological outcomes of NOM combined with 4 months of adjuvant capecitabine. Patients with resectable rectal cancer (≤ 8 cm from the anal verge, cT2-4 or N+) underwent CRT (50-54 Gy in 25-27 fractions with capecitabine). Eight weeks post-CRT, a multidisciplinary team assessed cCR. Patients achieving cCR received six cycles of capecitabine (2 weeks on/1 week off) and were actively monitored. Results: Among 89 patients receiving CRT (2018-2023), 17 (19.1%) achieved cCR and were included. The median age was 65 years, and 64.7% were male. Eleven (64.7%) completed all six cycles of adjuvant therapy. After a median follow-up of 31.4 months, 11 patients (64.7%) remained disease-free. Local regrowth occurred in six patients (35.3%) with 2- and 4-year rates of 34.5% and 47.6%, respectively. Five underwent radical surgery, and one received transanal excision with systemic chemotherapy. At the time of assessment, 15 patients (88.2%) showed no evidence of disease, while two (11.8%) received palliative chemotherapy. All patients were alive. Conclusion NOM with adjuvant capecitabine showed promising oncological outcomes, offering an alternative to passive watch-and-wait approaches. Further refinement through multidisciplinary strategies is warranted.

Purpose: This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a weekly carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (KCd) regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had been previously treated with both bortezomib- and lenalidomide-containing regimens. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 33 patients with RRMM who received the KCd regimen between March 2020 and February 2024. All patients had prior exposure to both bortezomib and lenalidomide, and the majority (93.9%) were refractory to lenalidomide. Carfilzomib was administered once weekly at 70 mg/m2 (after a step-up dose), along with oral cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone. Treatment response was assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria, and survival outcomes were analyzed. Results: The overall response rate was 66.7%, including a complete response or better in 15.1% of patients and a very good partial response or better in 42.4%. With a median follow-up of 31.7 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.5 months (95% confidence interval, 11.47 to 15.53), while the median overall survival was not reached. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia (15.2%). Non-hematologic grade ≥ 3 toxicities were infrequent and manageable. Conclusion The weekly KCd regimen demonstrated encouraging efficacy and tolerability in a heavily pretreated RRMM population. These findings support its use as a feasible treatment option, particularly in patients refractory to lenalidomide.

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are an important treatment option for ulcerative colitis, providing rapid onset of action, oral administration, and efficacy even after biologic failure. The 3 approved agents—tofacitinib, filgotinib, and upadacitinib—differ in JAK isoform selectivity, leading to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety. Evidence from network meta-analyses, clinical trials, and real-world studies consistently shows that upadacitinib provides the highest efficacy for induction and maintenance of remission, whereas filgotinib demonstrates the most favorable safety profile. The strong efficacy of upadacitinib and tofacitinib is particularly relevant in patients with severe disease, including acute severe ulcerative colitis, and upadacitinib maintains high efficacy regardless of prior advanced therapy exposure. JAK inhibitors also benefit extraintestinal manifestations. Although risks such as herpes zoster, serious infection, thromboembolism, and major cardiovascular events differ among agents, long-term data suggest generally acceptable safety when used appropriately. Intraclass JAK-to-JAK cycling is feasible, with about half of patients achieving steroid-free clinical remission in retrospective cohorts. Based on mechanistic, clinical, and real-world evidence, filgotinib may be a first-line option for patients with lower disease activity or when safety is a priority, whereas upadacitinib or tofacitinib may be preferred in higher disease activity. Strategically selecting agents may improve durability and outcomes.

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a frequent phenotype of BRCA-mutanttumors. Tumors with BRCAness may show characteristics of BRCA-mutant tumors and respond to similar treatments. Next-generation sequencing is an efficient and cost-effective method for simultaneously sequencing multiple cancer susceptibility genes, surpassing conventional Sanger testing. Methods: A total of 148 women with TNBC were recruited from December 2015 to November 2018, as part of a sub-analysis based on the PEARLY trial data. Of them, 103 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). The targeted genes related to hereditary cancers were sequenced using the 65-gene germline next-generation sequencing (gNGS) panel pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (P&LPs) were determined by Sanger sequencing. We examined the occurrence of pathologic complete remission (ypCR) in patients with P&LPs. Results: The patients’ median age was 47 years (range, 27–69 years). Twenty (13.7%) of 148 patients had P&LP in six genes, including BARD1 (n = 2), BRCA1 (n = 9), BRCA2 (n = 5), CHEK2 (n = 1), RAD51C (n = 1), and RAD51D (n = 2). Among the 103 patients with NCT, 43 (41.7%) achieved ypCR (P&LPs; 9 individuals vs. non-variants; 34 individuals). Among the 103 patients with NCT, 14 (9.3%) had P&LPs. Nine of 14 patients with P&LPs, including BARD1 (n = 2), BRCA1 (n = 4), BRCA2 (n = 1), RAD51C (n = 1), and RAD51D (n = 1), achieved ypCR, showing a trend toward statistical significance (p = 0.066). Conclusion Germline P&LP mutations in TNBC patients can be detected by gNGS. This panel test can identify BRCA and BRCAness mutations that may predict ypCR in TNBC.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of coil embolization of venous segments in patients with Type IIa pelvic arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 13 patients (median age, 43 years, range 20–62 years, 7 males) who underwent transvenous coil embolization for Type IIa pelvic AVM (characterized by multiple arterioles shunting to focal venous segments of a single draining vein) without the use of additional liquid embolic agents from March 2017 to February 2023. Treatment outcomes were analyzed based on clinical evaluations, post angiography findings, and follow-up CT. Results: Fourteen procedures were performed on 13 patients. Except in one patient, all treatments were completed in a single session. Transvenous access was employed in 10 procedures, whereas direct puncture was used in four sessions. The embolization procedures used an average of 55.7 ± 58.5 coils (range, 7–238) and lasted an average of 127.3 ± 39.5 minutes.The technical success rate was 92.9% (of 13/14). All patients reported symptom improvement. Follow-up CT scans showed complete occlusion of the AVM without recurrence in ten of the 13 patients. There was one minor adverse event: a small retroperitoneal hemorrhage, likely related to direct puncture, which resolved spontaneously. No other adverse events were observed. Conclusion Coil embolization of the draining vein segment, without the use of additional liquid embolic agents is a safe and effective method for managing Type IIa pelvic AVM.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.

Background and Objectives: The risk profiles, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes for women undergoing bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well defined compared to those in men. Methods: COronary BIfurcation Stenting III (COBIS III) is a multicenter, real-world registry of 2,648 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents.We compared the angiographic and procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes based on sex. The primary outcome was 5-year target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Results: Women (n=635, 24%) were older, had hypertension and diabetes more often, and had smaller main vessel and side branch reference diameters than men. The pre- and post-PCI angiographic percentage diameter stenoses of the main vessel and side branch were comparable between women and men. There were no differences in procedural characteristics between the sexes. Women and men had a similar risk of TLF (6.3% vs. 7.1%, p=0.63) as well as its individual components and sex was not an independent predictor of TLF. This finding was consistent in the left main and 2 stenting subgroups. Conclusions In patients undergoing bifurcation PCI, sex was not an independent predictor of adverse outcome.