Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT. Materials and Methods: This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Results: Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised. Conclusion Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.

Background: The clinical implications of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein autoantibodies (MOG-Abs) are increasing. Establishing MOG-Ab assays is essential for effectively treating patients with MOG-Abs. We established an in-house cell-based assay (CBA) to detect MOG-Abs to identify correlations with patients’ clinical characteristics. Methods: We established the CBA using HEK 293 cells transiently overexpressing fulllength human MOG, tested it against 166 samples from a multicenter registry of central nervous system (CNS) inflammatory disorders, and compared the results with those of the Oxford MOG-Ab-based CBA and a commercial MOG-Ab CBA kit. We recruited additional patients with MOG-Abs and compared the clinical characteristics of MOG-Ab-associated disease (MOGAD) with those of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Results: Of 166 samples tested, 10 tested positive for MOG-Abs, with optic neuritis (ON) being the most common manifestation (4/15, 26.7%). The in-house and Oxford MOG-Ab CBAs agreed for 164/166 (98.8%) samples (κ = 0.883, P < 0.001); two patients (2/166, 1.2%) were only positive in our in-house CBA, and the CBA scores of the two laboratories correlated well (r = 0.663, P < 0.001). The commercial MOG-Ab CBA kit showed one falsenegative and three false-positive results. The clinical presentation at disease onset differed between MOGAD and NMOSD; ON was the most frequent manifestation in MOGAD, and transverse myelitis was most frequent in NMOSD. Conclusions The in-house CBA for MOG-Abs demonstrated reliable results and can potentially be used to evaluate CNS inflammatory disorders. A comprehensive, long-term study with a large patient population would clarify the clinical significance of MOG-Abs.

Purpose: This subgroup analysis of the Korean subset of patients in the phase 3 LASER301 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to lazertinib (240 mg/day) or gefitinib (250 mg/day). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In total, 172 Korean patients were enrolled (lazertinib, n=87; gefitinib, n=85). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. One-third of patients had brain metastases (BM) at baseline. Median PFS was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7 to 26.1) for lazertinib and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.3) for gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.60). This was supported by PFS analysis based on blinded independent central review. Significant PFS benefit with lazertinib was consistently observed across predefined subgroups, including patients with BM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.53) and those with L858R mutations (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.63). Lazertinib safety data were consistent with its previously reported safety profile. Common adverse events (AEs) in both groups included rash, pruritus, and diarrhoea. Numerically fewer severe AEs and severe treatment–related AEs occurred with lazertinib than gefitinib. Conclusion Consistent with results for the overall LASER301 population, this analysis showed significant PFS benefit with lazertinib versus gefitinib with comparable safety in Korean patients with untreated EGFRm NSCLC, supporting lazertinib as a new potential treatment option for this patient population.

Background: and Purpose: Although dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is the second most common cause of neurodegenerative dementia, its clinical prevalence is low. We developed a short and easy-to-complete DLB screening questionnaire (DLBSQ) to raise diagnostic sensitivity in routine clinical settings. Methods: A total of 501 participants were retrospectively enrolled, including 71 controls, 184 patients without DLB, and 246 patients with probable DLB. All patients underwent clinical evaluation, including core features of DLB, the DLBSQ, brain magnetic resonance imaging, and detailed neuropsychological assessments. The diagnostic performance of the DLBSQ for probable DLB was investigated using a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: Total DLBSQ score was associated with visuospatial and frontal/executive dysfunction and the diagnosis of probable DLB. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for total DLBSQ score was 0.727. Youden’s method revealed an optimal cutoff value of 3. The sensitivity and specificity of the DLBSQ were 68.7% and 62.4%, respectively. Its discriminating performance improved when cognitive test profiles were additionally considered (area under the curve: 0.822, sensitivity: 80.6%, and specificity: 70.4%). Conclusions The DLBSQ might be a useful screening tool for DLB in routine clinical practice with good sensitivity and specificity.

The pathophysiological mechanism of cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is complicated. Mediation analysis is an important statistical tool for gaining insight into the complex mechanisms of exposure-outcome effects. We investigated the potential mediating role of the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) on the association between fluid balance (overhydration/extracellular water, OH/ECW) and left ventricular diastolic function (E/e´ ratio) in patients with CKD not yet on dialysis. Methods: Bioimpedance spectroscopy, echocardiography, and laboratory evaluations were performed on 425 consecutive patients on the same day. The patients were classified into two groups according to the estimated glomerular filtration rate corresponding to CKD stages 3 and 5. Mediation analysis was performed using the PROCESS macro and bootstrapping methods. Results: OH/ECW and LVMI were positively correlated with the E/e´ ratio in both the CKD stages 3 and five groups. In CKD stage 5, there was a statistically significant association between OH/ECW and LVMI, whereas no correlation was observed in CKD stage 3. In the mediation analysis, LVMI positively mediated the relationship between OH/ECW and E/e´ ratio when controlling for confounders in patients with CKD stage 5 (B = 2.602; Boot 95% confidence interval, 1.313–4.076). Conclusion: In our analysis, the indirect effect of mediators was significant in patients with advanced CKD. Therefore, our study suggests that further research on several other risk factors may be needed to determine the underlying mechanisms of association between the associated factors in all CKD stages.

Rare diseases are predominantly genetic or inherited, and patients with these conditions frequently exhibit neurological symptoms. Diagnosing and treating many rare diseases is a complex challenge, and their low prevalence complicates the performance of research, which in turn hinders the advancement of therapeutic options. One strategy to address this issue is the creation of national or international registries for rare diseases, which can help researchers monitor and investigate their natural progression. In the Republic of Korea, we established a registry across 5 centers that focuses on 3 rare diseases, all of which are characterized by gait disturbances resulting from motor system dysfunction. The registry will collect clinical information and human bioresources from patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, spinocerebellar ataxia, and hereditary spastic paraplegia. These resources will be stored at ICreaT and the National Biobank of Korea. Once the registry is complete, the data will be made publicly available for further research. Through this registry, our research team is dedicated to identifying genetic variants that are specific to Korean patients, uncovering biomarkers that show a strong correlation with clinical symptoms, and leveraging this information for early diagnosis and the development of treatments.