Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits high de novo recurrence rates post-resection. Current post-surgery recurrence prediction methods are limited, emphasizing the need for reliable biomarkers to assess recurrence risk. We aimed to develop methylation-based markers for classifying HCC patients and predicting their risk of de novo recurrence post-surgery. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed data from HCC patients who underwent surgical resection in Korea, excluding those with recurrence within one year post-surgery. Using the Infinium Methylation EPIC array on 140 samples in the discovery cohort, we classified patients into low- and high-risk groups based on methylation profiles. Distinctive markers were identified through random forest analysis. These markers were validated in the cancer genome atlas (n=217), Validation cohort 1 (n=63) and experimental Validation using a methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting (MS-HRM) assay in Validation cohort 1 and Validation cohort 2 (n=63). Results: The low-risk recurrence group (methylation group 1; MG1) showed a methylation average of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–0.77) with a 23.5% recurrence rate, while the high-risk group (MG2) had an average of 0.17 (95% CI 0.14–0.20) with a 44.1% recurrence rate (P<0.03). Validation confirmed the applicability of methylation markers across diverse populations, showing high accuracy in predicting the probability of HCC recurrence risk (area under the curve 96.8%). The MS-HRM assay confirmed its effectiveness in predicting de novo recurrence with 95.5% sensitivity, 89.7% specificity, and 92.2% accuracy. Conclusions Methylation markers effectively classified HCC patients by de novo recurrence risk, enhancing prediction accuracy and potentially offering personalized management strategies.

Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits high de novo recurrence rates post-resection. Current post-surgery recurrence prediction methods are limited, emphasizing the need for reliable biomarkers to assess recurrence risk. We aimed to develop methylation-based markers for classifying HCC patients and predicting their risk of de novo recurrence post-surgery. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed data from HCC patients who underwent surgical resection in Korea, excluding those with recurrence within one year post-surgery. Using the Infinium Methylation EPIC array on 140 samples in the discovery cohort, we classified patients into low- and high-risk groups based on methylation profiles. Distinctive markers were identified through random forest analysis. These markers were validated in the cancer genome atlas (n=217), Validation cohort 1 (n=63) and experimental Validation using a methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting (MS-HRM) assay in Validation cohort 1 and Validation cohort 2 (n=63). Results: The low-risk recurrence group (methylation group 1; MG1) showed a methylation average of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–0.77) with a 23.5% recurrence rate, while the high-risk group (MG2) had an average of 0.17 (95% CI 0.14–0.20) with a 44.1% recurrence rate (P<0.03). Validation confirmed the applicability of methylation markers across diverse populations, showing high accuracy in predicting the probability of HCC recurrence risk (area under the curve 96.8%). The MS-HRM assay confirmed its effectiveness in predicting de novo recurrence with 95.5% sensitivity, 89.7% specificity, and 92.2% accuracy. Conclusions Methylation markers effectively classified HCC patients by de novo recurrence risk, enhancing prediction accuracy and potentially offering personalized management strategies.

Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits high de novo recurrence rates post-resection. Current post-surgery recurrence prediction methods are limited, emphasizing the need for reliable biomarkers to assess recurrence risk. We aimed to develop methylation-based markers for classifying HCC patients and predicting their risk of de novo recurrence post-surgery. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed data from HCC patients who underwent surgical resection in Korea, excluding those with recurrence within one year post-surgery. Using the Infinium Methylation EPIC array on 140 samples in the discovery cohort, we classified patients into low- and high-risk groups based on methylation profiles. Distinctive markers were identified through random forest analysis. These markers were validated in the cancer genome atlas (n=217), Validation cohort 1 (n=63) and experimental Validation using a methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting (MS-HRM) assay in Validation cohort 1 and Validation cohort 2 (n=63). Results: The low-risk recurrence group (methylation group 1; MG1) showed a methylation average of 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–0.77) with a 23.5% recurrence rate, while the high-risk group (MG2) had an average of 0.17 (95% CI 0.14–0.20) with a 44.1% recurrence rate (P<0.03). Validation confirmed the applicability of methylation markers across diverse populations, showing high accuracy in predicting the probability of HCC recurrence risk (area under the curve 96.8%). The MS-HRM assay confirmed its effectiveness in predicting de novo recurrence with 95.5% sensitivity, 89.7% specificity, and 92.2% accuracy. Conclusions Methylation markers effectively classified HCC patients by de novo recurrence risk, enhancing prediction accuracy and potentially offering personalized management strategies.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate postoperative imaging findings of patients who underwent breastconserving surgery for cancer and reconstruction with MegaDerm® (sheet-type and pellet-type), analyzing false positives and recurrences, using multi-modality images. Materials and Methods: This study included 201 women (age range: 28–81 years, mean age ± standard deviation: 53.2 ± 8.6 years) who underwent breast-conserving surgery and immediate reconstruction with MegaDerm®. Post-surgery, each patient underwent at least one mammography (MG), ultrasonography (US), and MRI, totaling 713 MG, 1063 US, and 607 MRI examinations. Postoperative images were reviewed separately for the two types of MegaDerm®, and suspicious imaging findings (false positives and recurrences) were analyzed, with a particular focus on the findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®. Results: MegaDerm® appeared as a circumscribed mass with homogeneous iso- or high density on MG, posterior shadowing on US, and no enhancement on MRI. Calcification was more common and increased in size in sheet-type MegaDerm®, while pellet-type often exhibited irregular margins. Nine out of 17 false positives had suspicious findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®, and six out of nine recurrences showed similar findings. Common suspicious findings included calcifications, asymmetries, and MegaDerm® irregularities on MG; masses and MegaDerm® irregularities on US; and enhancing masses and MegaDerm® irregularities with enhancement on MRI. Notably, MegaDerm® irregularity with calcification was observed on MG and US in only one recurrence case. In 44.4% (4/9) of false-positives in direct contact with MegaDerm®, suspicious findings showed no change or resolution on follow-up. Conclusion Suspicious imaging findings in direct contact with MegaDerm® may be associated with false positives or recurrences. Therefore, it is essential to recognize these characteristic findings and review the patient’s history of MegaDerm® insertion when in doubt.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate postoperative imaging findings of patients who underwent breastconserving surgery for cancer and reconstruction with MegaDerm® (sheet-type and pellet-type), analyzing false positives and recurrences, using multi-modality images. Materials and Methods: This study included 201 women (age range: 28–81 years, mean age ± standard deviation: 53.2 ± 8.6 years) who underwent breast-conserving surgery and immediate reconstruction with MegaDerm®. Post-surgery, each patient underwent at least one mammography (MG), ultrasonography (US), and MRI, totaling 713 MG, 1063 US, and 607 MRI examinations. Postoperative images were reviewed separately for the two types of MegaDerm®, and suspicious imaging findings (false positives and recurrences) were analyzed, with a particular focus on the findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®. Results: MegaDerm® appeared as a circumscribed mass with homogeneous iso- or high density on MG, posterior shadowing on US, and no enhancement on MRI. Calcification was more common and increased in size in sheet-type MegaDerm®, while pellet-type often exhibited irregular margins. Nine out of 17 false positives had suspicious findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®, and six out of nine recurrences showed similar findings. Common suspicious findings included calcifications, asymmetries, and MegaDerm® irregularities on MG; masses and MegaDerm® irregularities on US; and enhancing masses and MegaDerm® irregularities with enhancement on MRI. Notably, MegaDerm® irregularity with calcification was observed on MG and US in only one recurrence case. In 44.4% (4/9) of false-positives in direct contact with MegaDerm®, suspicious findings showed no change or resolution on follow-up. Conclusion Suspicious imaging findings in direct contact with MegaDerm® may be associated with false positives or recurrences. Therefore, it is essential to recognize these characteristic findings and review the patient’s history of MegaDerm® insertion when in doubt.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate postoperative imaging findings of patients who underwent breastconserving surgery for cancer and reconstruction with MegaDerm® (sheet-type and pellet-type), analyzing false positives and recurrences, using multi-modality images. Materials and Methods: This study included 201 women (age range: 28–81 years, mean age ± standard deviation: 53.2 ± 8.6 years) who underwent breast-conserving surgery and immediate reconstruction with MegaDerm®. Post-surgery, each patient underwent at least one mammography (MG), ultrasonography (US), and MRI, totaling 713 MG, 1063 US, and 607 MRI examinations. Postoperative images were reviewed separately for the two types of MegaDerm®, and suspicious imaging findings (false positives and recurrences) were analyzed, with a particular focus on the findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®. Results: MegaDerm® appeared as a circumscribed mass with homogeneous iso- or high density on MG, posterior shadowing on US, and no enhancement on MRI. Calcification was more common and increased in size in sheet-type MegaDerm®, while pellet-type often exhibited irregular margins. Nine out of 17 false positives had suspicious findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®, and six out of nine recurrences showed similar findings. Common suspicious findings included calcifications, asymmetries, and MegaDerm® irregularities on MG; masses and MegaDerm® irregularities on US; and enhancing masses and MegaDerm® irregularities with enhancement on MRI. Notably, MegaDerm® irregularity with calcification was observed on MG and US in only one recurrence case. In 44.4% (4/9) of false-positives in direct contact with MegaDerm®, suspicious findings showed no change or resolution on follow-up. Conclusion Suspicious imaging findings in direct contact with MegaDerm® may be associated with false positives or recurrences. Therefore, it is essential to recognize these characteristic findings and review the patient’s history of MegaDerm® insertion when in doubt.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate postoperative imaging findings of patients who underwent breastconserving surgery for cancer and reconstruction with MegaDerm® (sheet-type and pellet-type), analyzing false positives and recurrences, using multi-modality images. Materials and Methods: This study included 201 women (age range: 28–81 years, mean age ± standard deviation: 53.2 ± 8.6 years) who underwent breast-conserving surgery and immediate reconstruction with MegaDerm®. Post-surgery, each patient underwent at least one mammography (MG), ultrasonography (US), and MRI, totaling 713 MG, 1063 US, and 607 MRI examinations. Postoperative images were reviewed separately for the two types of MegaDerm®, and suspicious imaging findings (false positives and recurrences) were analyzed, with a particular focus on the findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®. Results: MegaDerm® appeared as a circumscribed mass with homogeneous iso- or high density on MG, posterior shadowing on US, and no enhancement on MRI. Calcification was more common and increased in size in sheet-type MegaDerm®, while pellet-type often exhibited irregular margins. Nine out of 17 false positives had suspicious findings in direct contact with MegaDerm®, and six out of nine recurrences showed similar findings. Common suspicious findings included calcifications, asymmetries, and MegaDerm® irregularities on MG; masses and MegaDerm® irregularities on US; and enhancing masses and MegaDerm® irregularities with enhancement on MRI. Notably, MegaDerm® irregularity with calcification was observed on MG and US in only one recurrence case. In 44.4% (4/9) of false-positives in direct contact with MegaDerm®, suspicious findings showed no change or resolution on follow-up. Conclusion Suspicious imaging findings in direct contact with MegaDerm® may be associated with false positives or recurrences. Therefore, it is essential to recognize these characteristic findings and review the patient’s history of MegaDerm® insertion when in doubt.

Purpose: This study examined longitudinal changes in interstitial lung abnormalities (ILAs) and predictors of clinically significant interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) in a screening population with ILAs. Materials and Methods: We retrieved 36891 low-dose chest CT records from screenings between January 2003 and May 2021. After identifying 101 patients with ILAs, the clinical findings, spirometry results, and initial and follow-up CT findings, including visual and artificial intelligence-based quantitative analyses, were compared between patients diagnosed with ILD (n = 23, 23%) and those who were not (n = 78, 77%). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant parameters for the clinical diagnosis of ILD. Results: Twenty-three patients (n = 23, 23%) were subsequently diagnosed with clinically significant ILDs at follow-up (mean, 8.7 years). Subpleural fibrotic ILAs on initial CT and signs of progression on follow-up CT were common in the ILD group (both p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis revealed that emerging respiratory symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 5.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28–24.21; p = 0.022) and progression of ILAs at follow-up chest CT (OR, 4.07; 95% CI, 1.00–16.54; p = 0.050) were significant parameters for clinical diagnosis of ILD. Conclusion Clinically significant ILD was subsequently diagnosed in approximately one-quarter of the screened population with ILAs. Emerging respiratory symptoms and progression of ILAs at followup chest CT can be predictors of clinically significant ILDs.

Purpose: This study examined longitudinal changes in interstitial lung abnormalities (ILAs) and predictors of clinically significant interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) in a screening population with ILAs. Materials and Methods: We retrieved 36891 low-dose chest CT records from screenings between January 2003 and May 2021. After identifying 101 patients with ILAs, the clinical findings, spirometry results, and initial and follow-up CT findings, including visual and artificial intelligence-based quantitative analyses, were compared between patients diagnosed with ILD (n = 23, 23%) and those who were not (n = 78, 77%). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant parameters for the clinical diagnosis of ILD. Results: Twenty-three patients (n = 23, 23%) were subsequently diagnosed with clinically significant ILDs at follow-up (mean, 8.7 years). Subpleural fibrotic ILAs on initial CT and signs of progression on follow-up CT were common in the ILD group (both p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis revealed that emerging respiratory symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 5.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28–24.21; p = 0.022) and progression of ILAs at follow-up chest CT (OR, 4.07; 95% CI, 1.00–16.54; p = 0.050) were significant parameters for clinical diagnosis of ILD. Conclusion Clinically significant ILD was subsequently diagnosed in approximately one-quarter of the screened population with ILAs. Emerging respiratory symptoms and progression of ILAs at followup chest CT can be predictors of clinically significant ILDs.

Purpose: The role of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) treatment remains controversial. We conducted a retrospective, multicenter, nationwide study in Korea to evaluate the outcomes of alloSCT in Asian patients with MM. Materials and Methods: Overall, 109 patients with MM who underwent alloSCT between 2003 and 2020 were included in this study. Data were collected from the Korean Multiple Myeloma Working Party Registry. Results: The overall response rate and stringent complete response plus complete response (CR) rates were 67.0 and 46.8%, respectively, after alloSCT. At a median follow-up of 32.5 months, the 3-year probability of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 69.3% and 71.8%, respectively. The 3-year probabilities of OS rates in the upfront alloSCT, tandem auto-alloSCT, and later alloSCT groups were 75.0%, 88.9%, and 61.1%, respectively. Patients who achieved CR before or after alloSCT had significantly longer OS (89.8 vs. 18 months and 89.8 vs. 15.2 months, respectively). Even though patients who did not achieve CR prior to alloSCT, those who achieve CR after alloSCT had improved PFS and OS compared to those who had no achievement of CR both prior and after alloSCT. Patients who underwent alloSCT with 1-2 prior treatment lines had improved PFS (22.4 vs. 4.5 months) and OS (45.6 vs. 15.3 months) compared to those with three or more prior treatment lines. Conclusion AlloSCT may be a promising therapeutic option especially for younger, chemosensitive patients with earlier implementation from relapse.