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.

An avulsion fracture occurs when a muscle-tendon unit attached to a bone produces sufficient force to tear a fragment of the bone. If not treated properly, this injury can lead to deformity, nonunion, malunion, pain, and disability. Although avulsion fractures around the foot and ankle can occur anywhere there are tendon and ligament attachments, they are common in the anterior talofibular ligament, anterior-inferior tibiotalar ligament, calcaneal tuberosity, the base of the fifth metatarsal, and navicular bone. The optimal treatment for each fracture depends on the location and severity of the fracture.Conservative treatment involves limiting weight bearing for a period, splint immobilization, and using various orthoses. Surgical treatment is usually reserved for cases of severe displacement or when nonsurgical treatment has failed. The goals of surgery include reduction of the fracture fragment, prevention of nonunion or malunion and soft tissue injury, and early return to function. The decision for each treatment modality may depend on the patient demographics or preferences and the surgeon experience. This review summarizes previous and current views on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of common avulsion fractures to guide the treatment and diagnosis.

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.

This study aimed to analyze the experiences of new nurses during their first year of hospital employment to gather data for the development of an evidence-based new nurse residency program focused on adaptability. Methods: This study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Korea between March and August 2021 with 80 new nurses who wrote in critical reflective journals during their first year of work. NetMiner 4.5.0 was used to conduct a text network analysis of the critical reflective journals to uncover core keywords and topics across three periods. Results: In the journals, over time, degree centrality emerged as “study” and “patient understanding” for 1 to 3 months, “insufficient” and “stress” for 4 to 6 months, and “handover” and “preparation” for 7 to 12 months. Major sub-themes at 1 to 3 months were: “rounds,” “intravenous-cannulation,” “medical device,” and “patient understanding”; at 4 to 6 months they were “admission,” “discharge,” “oxygen therapy,” and “disease”; and at 7 to 12 months they were “burden,” “independence,” and “solution.” Conclusion:These results provide valuable insights into the challenges and experiences encountered by new nurses during different stages of their field adaptation process. This information may highlight the best nurse leadership methods for improving institutional education and supporting new nurses’ transitions to the hospital work environment.

Purpose: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is emerging as a valuable non-invasive tool to identify tumor heterogeneity and tumor burden. This study investigated ctDNA dynamics in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib. Materials and Methods: In this prospective biomarker study, plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) samples obtained at baseline, at the first response evaluation after 2 cycles of treatment, and at the time of progressive disease were sequenced using a targeted next-generation sequencing platform which included 106 genes. Results: A total of 285 blood samples from 110 patients were analyzed. Higher baseline cfDNA concentration was associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). After 2 cycles of treatment, variant allele frequency (VAF) in the majority of ctDNA mutations decreased with a mean relative change of –31.6%. Decreases in the VAF of TP53, APC, TCF7L2, and ROS1 after 2 cycles of regorafenib were associated with longer PFS. We used the sum of VAF at each time point as a surrogate for the overall ctDNA burden. A reduction in sum (VAF) of ≥ 50% after 2 cycles was associated with longer PFS (6.1 vs. 2.7 months, p=0.002), OS (11.3 vs. 5.9 months, p=0.001), and higher disease control rate (86.3% vs. 51.1%, p < 0.001). VAF of the majority of the ctDNA mutations increased at the time of disease progression, and VAF of BRAF increased markedly. Conclusion Reduction in ctDNA burden as estimated by sum (VAF) could be used to predict treatment outcome of regorafenib.

Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has significantly impacted the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Our study investigated the change in diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer with the progress of COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: The study group comprised 6,514 recently diagnosed breast cancer patients between January 1, 2019, and February 28, 2021. The patients were divided into two groups: pre–COVID-19 period (3,182; January 2019 to December 2019) and COVID-19 pandemic period (3,332; January 2020 to February 2021). Clinicopathological information related to the first treatment after breast cancer diagnosis was retrospectively collected and analyzed in the two groups. Results: Among the 6,514 breast cancer patients, 3,182 were in the pre–COVID-19 period and 3,332 were in the COVID-19 pandemic period. According to our evaluation, the least breast cancer diagnosis (21.8%) was seen in the first quarter of 2020. The diagnosis increased gradually except for the fourth quarter in 2020. While early-stage breast cancer was diagnosed 1,601 (48.1%) during the COVID-19 pandemic (p=0.001), the number of surgical treatments increased 4.6% (p < 0.001), and the treatment time was slightly shorter 2 days (p=0.001). The breast cancer subtype distribution was not statistically different between the pre–COVID-19 and COVID-19 period groups. Conclusion In the early stages of the pandemic, the number of breast cancer cases temporarily decreased; however, they stabilized soon, and no significant differences could be identified in the diagnosis and treatment when compared to the period before the pandemic.