We report 2 cases of cervical myelopathy treated using a posterior cervical muscle-preserving interspinous process approach with decompression. This technique allows effective central decompression while preserving the extensor musculature and the anchoring function of the spinous processes. The first case involved a 64-year-old woman with multilevel cervical stenosis and myelopathy who underwent decompression at C5–7. The second case involved a 70-year-old woman with C4–5 ossification of the yellow ligament and progressive left arm weakness who underwent single-level decompression. Notably, neither case exhibited significant foraminal stenosis. In both procedures, a small midline incision was made to expose the interspinous space, followed by retraction of the interspinalis cervicis using a blunt mini-Gelpi retractor and undercutting decompression performed with a Kerrison punch and a high-speed drill. No intraoperative complications were observed. Postoperatively, both patients demonstrated neurological and functional improvement, including increased modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey scores, decreased visual analogue scale pain scores, and preserved cervical alignment without evidence of dynamic instability on flexion–extension radiographs. The accompanying surgical videos illustrate the operative steps in detail and highlight the advantages of this minimally invasive technique for both single-level and multilevel decompression.

Purpose: While the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been established in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive and triple-negative breast cancers, its effectiveness in achieving pathological complete response (pCR) and optimal patient selection in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancers remain less clearly defined. This study aimed to identify immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based predictors of pCR and to develop a scoring model for ER-strong positive/HER2-negative breast cancer. Methods: Data from a prospective cohort were retrospectively analyzed. We included 522 patients with ER-strong positive/HER2-negative tumors who received NAC and surgery between 2008 and 2021. IHC markers including progesterone receptor (PR), Ki-67, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6), and p53 were evaluated to identify predictors of pCR. Independent predictors of pCR from multivariate logistic regression were used to develop a weighted 4-point model. Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis. The prognostic impact of pCR was evaluated using KaplanMeier and Cox regression analyses. Results: Independent predictors of pCR included PR-negative status, positivity for basallike markers (EGFR or CK5/6), and Ki-67 ≥ 50%. The scoring model demonstrated good discrimination for pCR (area under the curve = 0.754). pCR rates increased stepwise, with scores of 4.9% (low), 10.7% (intermediate), and 36.2% (high). In the high-score group, pCR was significantly associated with improved disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.09; p = 0.023) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR, 0.11; p = 0.035), whereas no significant survival differences according to pCR status were observed in the low and intermediate score groups. Conclusion This IHC-based model predicts pCR and helps identify subgroups in which pCR is associated with meaningful survival benefit following NAC in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancers. High-scoring patients may benefit from NAC, while patients with low- or intermediatescores may be better managed with surgery and endocrine therapy. This model may support personalized treatment decisions regarding NAC.

Purpose: Lobular carcinoma In Situ (LCIS) is a noninvasive lesion associated with an increased risk of invasive cancer. Since its removal from the tumor, node, metastasis classification in the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) guidelines, the clinical management of LCIS has shifted from surgery to surveillance. However, studies focusing on the risk and associated factors for invasive cancer development in pure LCIS without ductal carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) or invasive cancer remain limited. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 106 patients diagnosed with pure LCIS between 2008 and 2018. This study evaluated the effect of tamoxifen use and histologic type on the development of invasive cancer. Results: All 106 patients underwent surgery, and nine (8.5%) developed invasive cancer over a median follow-up of 67.5 months. The incidence of invasive cancer was lower in the tamoxifen group (6.3%, n = 4) than in the non-tamoxifen group (11.9%, n = 5), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.266). Pleomorphic LCIS had a significantly higher incidence of invasive cancer (30.0%, n = 3) than classic LCIS (6.3%, n = 6) (p = 0.045).Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of invasive cancer according to tamoxifen use (hazard ratio [HR], 2.031; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.544–7.579; p = 0.292). However, pleomorphic LCIS showed a trend toward an increased risk of invasive cancer compared to classic LCIS (HR, 3.856; 95% CI, 0.922–16.126; p = 0.064). Conclusion Postoperative tamoxifen did not significantly lower invasive cancer development in patients with pure LCIS. Pleomorphic LCIS may carry a higher risk than classic LCIS. These findings require tailored follow-up and treatment strategies based on the histologic subtype of LCIS.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Purpose: Processing methods for hematopoietic stem cells vary significantly across institutions, with no standardized guidelines currently in place. This lack of standardization presents challenges in ensuring consistent quality and out‑ comes of stem cell transplantation procedures. This study investigated current practices in peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) processing and storage among transplant centers in Korea to establish a foundation for the development of standardized guidelines. Methods: A comprehensive questionnaire was distributed to 46 hematopoietic stem cell transplantation centers in Korea, examining five key areas: PBSC collection procedures, use of cryopreservatives, cryopreservation protocols, quality control measures, and thawing protocols. Results: Analysis of the 29 responses revealed significant variations across different stages of PBSC handling. All centers used controlled-rate freezers, and 92.9% stored cells at temperatures below -150 ◦ C . However, other prac‑ tices varied widely. Additional post-collection processing was performed by 53.8% of respondents. DMSO concen‑ trations ranged from 5 to 15%, with diverse combinations of supplementary media. Notably, 28.6% of patients did not undergo post-thaw quality assessment tests. Conclusion This study identified significant heterogeneity in PBSC processing practices across Korean transplant centers. These findings underscore the need for evidence-based standardized guidelines to ensure consistent product quality and improve transplantation outcomes.

Objective: Primary frozen shoulder causes significant pain and progressively restricts shoulder movements. Diagnosis is made clinically based on patient history and physical examination. Management is mainly non-invasive owing to its self-limiting clinical course. However, clinical practice guidelines for frozen shoulder have not yet been developed in Korea. The developed guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of frozen shoulder. Methods: A guideline development committee reviewed the literature from four databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KMbase). Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) framework, the committee formulated two backgrounds and 16 key questions to address common clinical concerns. Recommendations were made using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Results: Diabetes, thyroid disease, and dyslipidemia significantly increase the risk of developing a frozen shoulder. Although frozen shoulder is often self-limiting, some patients may experience long-term functional disabilities. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging should be used as adjunctive tools alongside clinical diagnosis, and rather than as independent diagnostic methods. Noninvasive approaches, such as medications, physical modalities, exercises, electrical stimulation, and manual therapy, may reduce pain and improve shoulder function. Other noninvasive interventions have limited evidence, and their application should be based on clinical judgment. Intra-articular steroid injections are recommended for treatment, and physiotherapy or hydrodilation with steroid injections can also be beneficial. Conclusion These guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating primary frozen shoulder.

This systematic review evaluated psychiatric adverse events (AEs) following vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We included studies that reported or investigated psychiatric AEs in individuals who had received an approved COVID-19 vaccine in the Republic of Korea. Systematic electronic searches of Ovid-Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and KoreaMed databases were conducted on March 22, 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies 2.0. The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023449422). Of the 301 articles initially selected, 7 were included in the final analysis. All studies reported on sleep disturbances, and 2 highlighted anxiety-related AEs. Sleep disorders like insomnia and narcolepsy were the most prevalent AEs, while depression was not reported. Our review suggests that these AEs may have been influenced by biological mechanisms as well as the broader psychosocial context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although this study had limitations, such as a primary focus on the BNT162b2 vaccine and an observational study design, it offered a systematic, multi-vaccine analysis that fills a critical gap in the existing literature. This review underscores the need for continued surveillance of psychiatric AEs and guides future research to investigate underlying mechanisms, identify risk factors, and inform clinical management.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Committee (CoVaSC) was established in November 2021 to address the growing need for independent, in-depth scientific evidence on adverse events (AEs) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. This initiative was requested by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and led by the National Academy of Medicine of Korea. In September 2022, the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center was established, strengthening CoVaSC’s initiatives. The center has conducted various studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. During CoVaSC’s second research year, from September 29, 2022 to July 19, 2023, the center was restructured into 4 departments: Epidemiological Research, Clinical Research, Communication & Education, and International Cooperation & Policy Research. Its main activities include (1) managing CoVaSC and the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center, (2) surveying domestic and international trends in AE causality investigation, (3) assessing AEs following COVID-19 vaccination, (4) fostering international collaboration and policy research, and (5) organizing regular fora and training sessions for the public and clinicians. Causality assessments have been conducted for 27 diseases, and independent research has been conducted after organizing ad hoc committees comprising both epidemiologists and clinical experts on each AE of interest. The research process included protocol development, data analysis, interpretation of results, and causality assessment. These research outcomes have been shared transparently with the public and healthcare experts through various fora. The COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Research Center plans to continue strengthening and expanding its research activities to provide reliable, high-quality safety information to the public.