Objective: To test the performance of an artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) designed for fullfield digital mammography (FFDM) when applied to synthetic mammography (SM). Materials and Methods: We analyzed 501 women (mean age, 57 ± 11 years) who underwent preoperative mammography and breast cancer surgery. This cohort consisted of 1002 breasts, comprising 517 with cancer and 485 without. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and FFDM during the preoperative workup. The SM is routinely reconstructed using DBT. Commercial AI-CAD (Lunit Insight MMG, version 1.1.7.2) was retrospectively applied to SM and FFDM to calculate the abnormality scores for each breast. The median abnormality scores were compared for the 517 breasts with cancer using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Calibration curves of abnormality scores were evaluated. The discrimination performance was analyzed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using a 10% preset threshold. Sensitivity and specificity were further analyzed according to the mammographic and pathological characteristics.The results of SM and FFDM were compared. Results: AI-CAD demonstrated a significantly lower median abnormality score (71% vs. 96%, P < 0.001) and poorer calibration performance for SM than for FFDM. SM exhibited lower sensitivity (76.2% vs. 82.8%, P < 0.001), higher specificity (95.5% vs.91.8%, P < 0.001), and comparable AUC (0.86 vs. 0.87, P = 0.127) than FFDM. SM showed lower sensitivity than FFDM in asymptomatic breasts, dense breasts, ductal carcinoma in situ, T1, N0, and hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative cancers but showed higher specificity in non-cancerous dense breasts. Conclusion AI-CAD showed lower abnormality scores and reduced calibration performance for SM than for FFDM.Furthermore, the 10% preset threshold resulted in different discrimination performances for the SM. Given these limitations, off-label application of the current AI-CAD to SM should be avoided.

Purpose: In this study, we investigated the effect of bisphenol-A (BPA) and its major analogs, bisphenol-F (BPF), and bisphenol-S (BPS), on spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) populations using in vitro SSC culture and in vivo transplantation models. Materials and Methods: SSCs enriched from 6- to 8-day-old C57BL/6-eGFP+ male mice testes were treated with varying concentrations of bisphenols for 7 days to examine bisphenol-derived cytotoxicity and changes in SSC characteristics. We utilized flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR, and western blot analysis. The functional alteration of SSCs was further investigated by examining donor SSC-derived spermatogenesis evaluation through in vivo transplantation and subsequent testis analysis. Results: BPF exhibited a similar inhibitory effect on SSCs as BPA, demonstrating a significant decrease in SSC survival, inhibition of proliferation, and induction of apoptosis. On the other hand, while BPS was comparatively weaker than BPA and BPF, it still showed significant SSC cytotoxicity. Importantly, SSCs exposed to BPA, BPF, and BPS exhibited a significant reduction in donor SSC-derived germ cell colonies per total number of cultured cells, indicating that, like BPA, BPF, and BPS can induce a comparable reduction in functional SSCs in the recipient animals. However, the progress of spermatogenesis, as evidenced by histochemistry and the expressions of PCNA and SSC specific markers, collectively indicates that BPA, BPF, and BPS may not adversely affect the spermatogenesis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the major BPA substitutes, BPF and BPS, have significant cytotoxic effects on SSCs, similar to BPA. These effects may lead to a reduction in the functional self-renewal stem cell population and potential impacts on male fertility.

Objective: To test the performance of an artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) designed for fullfield digital mammography (FFDM) when applied to synthetic mammography (SM). Materials and Methods: We analyzed 501 women (mean age, 57 ± 11 years) who underwent preoperative mammography and breast cancer surgery. This cohort consisted of 1002 breasts, comprising 517 with cancer and 485 without. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and FFDM during the preoperative workup. The SM is routinely reconstructed using DBT. Commercial AI-CAD (Lunit Insight MMG, version 1.1.7.2) was retrospectively applied to SM and FFDM to calculate the abnormality scores for each breast. The median abnormality scores were compared for the 517 breasts with cancer using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Calibration curves of abnormality scores were evaluated. The discrimination performance was analyzed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using a 10% preset threshold. Sensitivity and specificity were further analyzed according to the mammographic and pathological characteristics.The results of SM and FFDM were compared. Results: AI-CAD demonstrated a significantly lower median abnormality score (71% vs. 96%, P < 0.001) and poorer calibration performance for SM than for FFDM. SM exhibited lower sensitivity (76.2% vs. 82.8%, P < 0.001), higher specificity (95.5% vs.91.8%, P < 0.001), and comparable AUC (0.86 vs. 0.87, P = 0.127) than FFDM. SM showed lower sensitivity than FFDM in asymptomatic breasts, dense breasts, ductal carcinoma in situ, T1, N0, and hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative cancers but showed higher specificity in non-cancerous dense breasts. Conclusion AI-CAD showed lower abnormality scores and reduced calibration performance for SM than for FFDM.Furthermore, the 10% preset threshold resulted in different discrimination performances for the SM. Given these limitations, off-label application of the current AI-CAD to SM should be avoided.

Purpose: In this study, we investigated the effect of bisphenol-A (BPA) and its major analogs, bisphenol-F (BPF), and bisphenol-S (BPS), on spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) populations using in vitro SSC culture and in vivo transplantation models. Materials and Methods: SSCs enriched from 6- to 8-day-old C57BL/6-eGFP+ male mice testes were treated with varying concentrations of bisphenols for 7 days to examine bisphenol-derived cytotoxicity and changes in SSC characteristics. We utilized flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR, and western blot analysis. The functional alteration of SSCs was further investigated by examining donor SSC-derived spermatogenesis evaluation through in vivo transplantation and subsequent testis analysis. Results: BPF exhibited a similar inhibitory effect on SSCs as BPA, demonstrating a significant decrease in SSC survival, inhibition of proliferation, and induction of apoptosis. On the other hand, while BPS was comparatively weaker than BPA and BPF, it still showed significant SSC cytotoxicity. Importantly, SSCs exposed to BPA, BPF, and BPS exhibited a significant reduction in donor SSC-derived germ cell colonies per total number of cultured cells, indicating that, like BPA, BPF, and BPS can induce a comparable reduction in functional SSCs in the recipient animals. However, the progress of spermatogenesis, as evidenced by histochemistry and the expressions of PCNA and SSC specific markers, collectively indicates that BPA, BPF, and BPS may not adversely affect the spermatogenesis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the major BPA substitutes, BPF and BPS, have significant cytotoxic effects on SSCs, similar to BPA. These effects may lead to a reduction in the functional self-renewal stem cell population and potential impacts on male fertility.

Objective: To test the performance of an artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) designed for fullfield digital mammography (FFDM) when applied to synthetic mammography (SM). Materials and Methods: We analyzed 501 women (mean age, 57 ± 11 years) who underwent preoperative mammography and breast cancer surgery. This cohort consisted of 1002 breasts, comprising 517 with cancer and 485 without. All patients underwent digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and FFDM during the preoperative workup. The SM is routinely reconstructed using DBT. Commercial AI-CAD (Lunit Insight MMG, version 1.1.7.2) was retrospectively applied to SM and FFDM to calculate the abnormality scores for each breast. The median abnormality scores were compared for the 517 breasts with cancer using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Calibration curves of abnormality scores were evaluated. The discrimination performance was analyzed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity using a 10% preset threshold. Sensitivity and specificity were further analyzed according to the mammographic and pathological characteristics.The results of SM and FFDM were compared. Results: AI-CAD demonstrated a significantly lower median abnormality score (71% vs. 96%, P < 0.001) and poorer calibration performance for SM than for FFDM. SM exhibited lower sensitivity (76.2% vs. 82.8%, P < 0.001), higher specificity (95.5% vs.91.8%, P < 0.001), and comparable AUC (0.86 vs. 0.87, P = 0.127) than FFDM. SM showed lower sensitivity than FFDM in asymptomatic breasts, dense breasts, ductal carcinoma in situ, T1, N0, and hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative cancers but showed higher specificity in non-cancerous dense breasts. Conclusion AI-CAD showed lower abnormality scores and reduced calibration performance for SM than for FFDM.Furthermore, the 10% preset threshold resulted in different discrimination performances for the SM. Given these limitations, off-label application of the current AI-CAD to SM should be avoided.

Purpose: In this study, we investigated the effect of bisphenol-A (BPA) and its major analogs, bisphenol-F (BPF), and bisphenol-S (BPS), on spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) populations using in vitro SSC culture and in vivo transplantation models. Materials and Methods: SSCs enriched from 6- to 8-day-old C57BL/6-eGFP+ male mice testes were treated with varying concentrations of bisphenols for 7 days to examine bisphenol-derived cytotoxicity and changes in SSC characteristics. We utilized flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR, and western blot analysis. The functional alteration of SSCs was further investigated by examining donor SSC-derived spermatogenesis evaluation through in vivo transplantation and subsequent testis analysis. Results: BPF exhibited a similar inhibitory effect on SSCs as BPA, demonstrating a significant decrease in SSC survival, inhibition of proliferation, and induction of apoptosis. On the other hand, while BPS was comparatively weaker than BPA and BPF, it still showed significant SSC cytotoxicity. Importantly, SSCs exposed to BPA, BPF, and BPS exhibited a significant reduction in donor SSC-derived germ cell colonies per total number of cultured cells, indicating that, like BPA, BPF, and BPS can induce a comparable reduction in functional SSCs in the recipient animals. However, the progress of spermatogenesis, as evidenced by histochemistry and the expressions of PCNA and SSC specific markers, collectively indicates that BPA, BPF, and BPS may not adversely affect the spermatogenesis. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the major BPA substitutes, BPF and BPS, have significant cytotoxic effects on SSCs, similar to BPA. These effects may lead to a reduction in the functional self-renewal stem cell population and potential impacts on male fertility.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.