Background: and Purpose The Treat Stroke to Target (TST) was a randomized clinical trial involving French and Korean patients demonstrating that a lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C, <70 mg/dL) target group (LT) experienced fewer cerebro-cardiovascular events than a higher target (90–110 mg/dL) group (HT). However, whether these results can be applied to Asian patients with different ischemic stroke subtypes remains unclear. Methods: Patients from 14 South Korean centers were analyzed separately. Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack with evidence of atherosclerosis were randomized into LT and HT groups. The primary endpoint was a composite of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, coronary or cerebral revascularization, and cardiovascular death. Results: Among 712 enrolled patients, the mean LDL-C level was 71.0 mg/dL in 357 LT patients and 86.1 mg/dL in 355 HT patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 24 (6.7%) of LT and in 31 (8.7%) of HT group patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]=0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.45–1.33, P=0.353). Cardiovascular events alone occurred significantly less frequently in the LT than in the HT group (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09–0.80, P=0.019), whereas there were no significant differences in ischemic stroke events (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.60–2.10, P=0.712). The benefit of LT was less apparent in patients with small vessel disease and intracranial atherosclerosis than in those with extracranial atherosclerosis. Conclusion In contrast to the French TST, the outcomes in Korean patients were neutral. Although LT was more effective in preventing cardiovascular diseases, it was not so in stroke prevention, probably attributed to the differences in stroke subtypes. Further studies are needed to elucidate the efficacy of statins and appropriate LDL-C targets in Asian patients with stroke.

Purpose: Breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutation is a well-known risk factor for breast cancer, and clinical interest in prophylactic mastectomy has increased in recent years.We investigated patients who were BRCA mutation carriers and underwent contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM), focusing on the incidence of occult malignancy after contralateral RRM. Methods: Prospectively collected data of patients with breast cancer treated at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent RRM with BRCA mutation who underwent RRM between January 2010 and November 2023 were included in this study.Among patients who underwent contralateral RRM, those with a primary cancer diagnosis were included, and those with occult malignancy on the contralateral RRM side were reviewed additionally. The demographics and pathologies of both primary breast cancer and occult malignancies were evaluated. Results: In our institution, 925 patients were identified as BRCA mutation carriers, and 320 patients underwent contralateral RRM along with primary breast cancer surgery. BRCA2 mutation occurred more frequently (54.8%) in the overall BRCA mutation cohort. Furthermore, we reviewed 320 patients diagnosed with breast cancer and detected as BRCA mutation carriers who underwent contralateral RRM; high proportion of them were BRCA1 mutation carriers.Interestingly, we found a low incidence of only seven patients (2.2%) with occult malignancy on contralateral RRM side, which is different from that reported in other nations. Conclusion The incidence of occult malignancy in the contralateral breast of breast cancer patients with breast cancer with BRCA mutation is significantly low, and may be influenced by several factors. Increased utilization of screening and advancements in diagnostic technologies in South Korea have reduced the chance of occult malignancy in RRM, and a variety of pathologic examination methods may affect the rate of incidence.

Purpose: This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed. Results: Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953). Conclusion Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: Breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutation is a well-known risk factor for breast cancer, and clinical interest in prophylactic mastectomy has increased in recent years.We investigated patients who were BRCA mutation carriers and underwent contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM), focusing on the incidence of occult malignancy after contralateral RRM. Methods: Prospectively collected data of patients with breast cancer treated at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent RRM with BRCA mutation who underwent RRM between January 2010 and November 2023 were included in this study.Among patients who underwent contralateral RRM, those with a primary cancer diagnosis were included, and those with occult malignancy on the contralateral RRM side were reviewed additionally. The demographics and pathologies of both primary breast cancer and occult malignancies were evaluated. Results: In our institution, 925 patients were identified as BRCA mutation carriers, and 320 patients underwent contralateral RRM along with primary breast cancer surgery. BRCA2 mutation occurred more frequently (54.8%) in the overall BRCA mutation cohort. Furthermore, we reviewed 320 patients diagnosed with breast cancer and detected as BRCA mutation carriers who underwent contralateral RRM; high proportion of them were BRCA1 mutation carriers.Interestingly, we found a low incidence of only seven patients (2.2%) with occult malignancy on contralateral RRM side, which is different from that reported in other nations. Conclusion The incidence of occult malignancy in the contralateral breast of breast cancer patients with breast cancer with BRCA mutation is significantly low, and may be influenced by several factors. Increased utilization of screening and advancements in diagnostic technologies in South Korea have reduced the chance of occult malignancy in RRM, and a variety of pathologic examination methods may affect the rate of incidence.

Purpose: This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed. Results: Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953). Conclusion Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Objective: Adult attachment style is linked to how an individual responds to threats or stress and is known to be related to the onset of psychiatric symptoms such as depression. However, as the current assessment of attachment type mainly relies on self-report questionnaires and can be prone to bias, there is a need to incorporate physiological factors along with psychological symptoms and history in this process. We aimed to predict the measurement of two important types of adult attachment with heart rate variability (HRV), early life stress experience, and subjective psychiatric symptoms. Methods: Five hundred eighty-two subjects with depressive disorder were recruited retrospectively from January 2015 to June 2021. The experience of early life stress and psychiatric symptoms were collected, and HRV measures were obtained as input for an ensembled Voting Regressor model of machine learning-based regression models, including linear regression, ElasticNet, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Results: Model performances evaluated with R-squared score averaged across 30 seeds were 0.377 and 0.188 for anxious- and avoidant-attachment, respectively. Mean absolute error averaged to 13.251 and 12.083, respectively. Shapley value importance analysis indicated that for both attachment types, the most important feature was the trait-anxiety, followed by emotional abuse, state-anxiety or self-reported depressive symptoms, and fear or helplessness felt in the moment of an early life stressor. Conclusion Our results provide the evidence base that may be utilized in clinical settings to predict the degree of attachment type using bio-psychological factors.

Objective: Adult attachment style is linked to how an individual responds to threats or stress and is known to be related to the onset of psychiatric symptoms such as depression. However, as the current assessment of attachment type mainly relies on self-report questionnaires and can be prone to bias, there is a need to incorporate physiological factors along with psychological symptoms and history in this process. We aimed to predict the measurement of two important types of adult attachment with heart rate variability (HRV), early life stress experience, and subjective psychiatric symptoms. Methods: Five hundred eighty-two subjects with depressive disorder were recruited retrospectively from January 2015 to June 2021. The experience of early life stress and psychiatric symptoms were collected, and HRV measures were obtained as input for an ensembled Voting Regressor model of machine learning-based regression models, including linear regression, ElasticNet, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Results: Model performances evaluated with R-squared score averaged across 30 seeds were 0.377 and 0.188 for anxious- and avoidant-attachment, respectively. Mean absolute error averaged to 13.251 and 12.083, respectively. Shapley value importance analysis indicated that for both attachment types, the most important feature was the trait-anxiety, followed by emotional abuse, state-anxiety or self-reported depressive symptoms, and fear or helplessness felt in the moment of an early life stressor. Conclusion Our results provide the evidence base that may be utilized in clinical settings to predict the degree of attachment type using bio-psychological factors.

Purpose: Adjuvant treatment for craniopharyngioma after surgery is controversial. Adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) can increase the risk of long-term sequelae. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is used to reduce treatment-related toxicity.In this study, we compared the treatment outcomes and toxicities of adjuvant therapies for craniopharyngioma. Materials and Methods: We analyzed patients who underwent craniopharyngioma tumor removal between 2000 and 2017. Of the 153 patients, 27 and 20 received adjuvant fractionated EBRT and SRS, respectively. We compared the local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival between groups that received adjuvant fractionated EBRT, SRS, and surveillance. Results: The median follow-up period was 77.7 months. For SRS and surveillance, the 10-year LC was 57.2% and 57.4%, respectively. No local progression was observed after adjuvant fractionated EBRT. One patient in the adjuvant fractionated EBRT group died owing to glioma 94 months after receiving radiotherapy (10-year PFS: 80%). The 10-year PFS was 43.6% and 50.7% in the SRS and surveillance groups, respectively. The treatment outcomes significantly differed according to adjuvant treatment in nongross total resection (GTR) patients. Additional treatment-related toxicity was comparable in the adjuvant fractionated EBRT and other groups. Conclusion Adjuvant fractionated EBRT could be effective in controlling local failure, especially in patients with non-GTR, while maintaining acceptable treatment-related toxicity.