Purpose: Limited treatment options exist for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after the failure of taxane-based chemotherapy and novel hormonal therapy. Here, we report the safety and efficacy of ifosfamide and mesna in patients with mCRPC after the failure of taxane-based chemotherapy and novel hormonal therapy (NCT06236789). Materials and Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer who had failed taxane-based chemotherapy and novel hormonal therapy received ifosfamide 2,500 mg/m2 and mesna 1,500 mg/m2 on days 1–3, repeated every 21 days. Safety, objective response rate, disease control rate, reduction in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration by >50% (PSA50) or >90% (PSA90), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Results: A total of 47 patients with mCRPC were included in the study. The median number of lines of treatment was 5 (range, 3 to 7). All patients were previously administered docetaxel and novel hormonal therapies including abiraterone (51.1%) and/or enzalutamide (61.7%). Thirty-eight patients (80.9%) were administered cabazitaxel. The objective response and disease control rates were 21.3% and 80.9%, respectively. PSA50 and PSA90 were achieved in 31.9% and 10.6%, respectively. During a median follow-up duration of 54.3 months, rPFS and OS were 5.0 and 9.0 months, respectively. All the patients experienced treatment-related adverse events of any grades; however, no new safety signs were detected. Genomic biomarker analysis revealed that alterations in the TP53 pathway were associated with inferior rPFS and OS. Conclusion Ifosfamide and mesna showed appreciable efficacy and manageable safety profiles in heavily treated patients with mCRPC.

Purpose: This study evaluates the Korean Cancer Study Group Geriatric Score-7 (KG-7) frailty screening tool’s effectiveness in elderly multiple myeloma (MM) patients to prevent under and overtreatment. Materials and Methods: This prospective pilot cohort study included 100 elderly patients aged 70 and older with newly diagnosed MM who had not undergone transplantation from August 2020 to January 2022. Results: The median age was 77 years, and 73.0% of patients were classified at International Staging System stages 2 or 3. Using a 5-point cutoff on the KG-7 index (non-frail, score ≥ 5; frail, score < 5), 31% were categorized as frail. After a median follow-up of 26.8 months, the 3-year overall survival rate was 73.0%. There was no statistically significant association between any frailty index and the risk of death. However, frail patients defined by the simplified frailty index (hazard ratio [HR], 2.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 5.95; p=0.030) and by KG-7 (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.03 to 5.86; p=0.043) had a significantly higher risk of grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicity, whereas the International Myeloma Working Group definition did not. Over a 24-month tracking period, vulnerability as measured by KG-7 either improved or deteriorated. Conclusion The pilot study, which had a limited number of participants, did not demonstrate KG-7’s effectiveness in predicting survival; however, it successfully predicted severe non-hematologic toxicities. We plan to conduct larger studies in elderly MM patients to determine whether KG-7 can help tailor their treatment regimens.

Objectives: Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable potential in healthcare communication. However, whether they can process complex, high-volume medical information, such as stroke-related content, remains insufficiently validated. This study aimed to evaluate the natural language processing capabilities of LLMs in handling such content and to develop an evaluation instrument. Methods: A survey compared educational materials generated by two LLMs (ChatGPT 4.0 and Claude 3) with neurologist-authored content on stroke. The materials were based on two clinical scenarios representing distinct stroke etiologies: cardioembolism and large-artery atherosclerosis. They were evaluated in terms of accuracy, legality, ethics, comprehensiveness, and information delivery. Scores for comprehensiveness and information delivery were compared according to participants’ agreement with the use of LLMs in healthcare. Results: ChatGPT received the highest scores across all domains, except for legality in Scenario 2. In Scenario 1, the ranking for accuracy and summarization of clinical information was, from highest to lowest, ChatGPT, Claude, and the neurologist (η2 = 0.140, p < 0.001; η2 = 0.175, p < 0.001). The same hierarchy was observed in Scenario 2 for accuracy (η2 = 0.077, p < 0.001) and summarization (η2 = 0.194, p < 0.001). Participants who agreed with the use of LLMs in healthcare assigned higher scores for the comprehensiveness (Scenario 1, p = 0.005; Scenario 2, p = 0.007) and information delivery (Scenario 1, p = 0.003; Scenario 2, p = 0.026) of ChatGPT-generated materials than participants who did not agree. Conclusions LLMs demonstrated adequate capability to convey complex content, such as stroke-related information, in an accessible and understandable manner for non-experts.

Reference management software (RMS) represents a cornerstone of modern academic writing and publishing. For decades, programs such as EndNote, Zotero, and Mendeley have played central roles in facilitating citation organization, bibliography formatting, and collaborative scholarship. Although each platform has introduced unique innovations, persistent limitations remain, particularly with respect to usability, accessibility, and accuracy. In parallel, the rise of generative artificial intelligence has introduced an unprecedented challenge: the inadvertent inclusion of fabricated or incorrect references mistakenly incorporated into manuscripts. This phenomenon has exposed a critical limitation of traditional RMS platforms, namely their inability to verify reference authenticity. Against this backdrop, new solutions have emerged. One such example is CiteWell (https://citewell.org/), an artificial intelligence (AI)-era RMS that introduces several notable innovations, including PubMed-integrated verification, an intuitive interface for new users, customizable journal-specific styles, and multilingual accessibility. This review provides a comprehensive historical overview of RMS, evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of major platforms, and positions emerging AI-based tools as a new paradigm that combines traditional reference management with essential safeguards for contemporary academic challenges.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Background: Acute deterioration of patients in general wards often leads to major adverse events (MAEs), including unplanned intensive care unit transfers, cardiac arrest, or death. Traditional early warning scores (EWSs) have shown limited predictive accuracy, with frequent false positives. We conducted a prospective observational external validation study of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based EWS, the VitalCare - Major Adverse Event Score (VC-MAES), at a tertiary medical center in the Republic of Korea. Methods: Adult patients from general wards, including internal medicine (IM) and obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN)—the latter were rarely investigated in prior AI-based EWS studies—were included. The VC-MAES predictions were compared with National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) predictions using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), and logistic regression for baseline EWS values. False-positives per true positive (FPpTP) were assessed based on the power threshold. Results: Of 6,039 encounters, 217 (3.6%) had MAEs (IM: 9.5%, OBGYN: 0.26%). Six hours prior to MAEs, the VC-MAES achieved an AUROC of 0.918 and an AUPRC of 0.352, including the OBGYN subgroup (AUROC, 0.964; AUPRC, 0.388), outperforming the NEWS (0.797 and 0.124) and MEWS (0.722 and 0.079). The FPpTP was reduced by up to 71%. Baseline VC-MAES was strongly associated with MAEs (P<0.001). Conclusions The VC-MAES significantly outperformed traditional EWSs in predicting adverse events in general ward patients. The robust performance and lower FPpTP suggest that broader adoption of the VC-MAES may improve clinical efficiency and resource allocation in general wards.

In recent years, treatment using implants has become common. Since 2016, dental implants have been insured as part of strengthening health insurance coverage. Consequently, the demand for implants is increasing. Accordingly, the importance of implant maintenance has been emphasized. Of which, implant retrievability is an important factor in implant success. Although the screw-retained type is an advantageous easy-to-retrieve prosthesis, an occlusal point cannot make it to the central axis of the implant. Thus, we aimed to introduce an implant setting method (screw hole indexing) that enables the maintenance of the proper occlusal point and enables retrievability by marking the screw holes of the implant.

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.