The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted the development of messenger RNA vaccines. Following extensive vaccination campaigns worldwide, several adverse reactions to these vaccines have been reported. This is a case series of unilateral lower extremity lymphedema after COVID-19 vaccination in two patients with a history of cervical cancer. An 82-year-old woman and a 68-year-old woman visited the outpatient clinic with unilateral leg edema after receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccine (BNT162b2; Pfizer-BioNTech) in the deltoid muscle. Both patients had a common history of cervical cancer treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy and were in complete remission. Gynecological evaluations, including laboratory and imaging studies, revealed no specific findings. Lymphoscintigraphy revealed delayed lymphatic drainage with diffuse dermal backflow in a unilateral lower extremity. This case series explores adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccination in patients who are at high risk of developing lymphedema, providing novel data for similar clinical presentations.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted the development of messenger RNA vaccines. Following extensive vaccination campaigns worldwide, several adverse reactions to these vaccines have been reported. This is a case series of unilateral lower extremity lymphedema after COVID-19 vaccination in two patients with a history of cervical cancer. An 82-year-old woman and a 68-year-old woman visited the outpatient clinic with unilateral leg edema after receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccine (BNT162b2; Pfizer-BioNTech) in the deltoid muscle. Both patients had a common history of cervical cancer treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy and were in complete remission. Gynecological evaluations, including laboratory and imaging studies, revealed no specific findings. Lymphoscintigraphy revealed delayed lymphatic drainage with diffuse dermal backflow in a unilateral lower extremity. This case series explores adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccination in patients who are at high risk of developing lymphedema, providing novel data for similar clinical presentations.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted the development of messenger RNA vaccines. Following extensive vaccination campaigns worldwide, several adverse reactions to these vaccines have been reported. This is a case series of unilateral lower extremity lymphedema after COVID-19 vaccination in two patients with a history of cervical cancer. An 82-year-old woman and a 68-year-old woman visited the outpatient clinic with unilateral leg edema after receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccine (BNT162b2; Pfizer-BioNTech) in the deltoid muscle. Both patients had a common history of cervical cancer treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy and were in complete remission. Gynecological evaluations, including laboratory and imaging studies, revealed no specific findings. Lymphoscintigraphy revealed delayed lymphatic drainage with diffuse dermal backflow in a unilateral lower extremity. This case series explores adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccination in patients who are at high risk of developing lymphedema, providing novel data for similar clinical presentations.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted the development of messenger RNA vaccines. Following extensive vaccination campaigns worldwide, several adverse reactions to these vaccines have been reported. This is a case series of unilateral lower extremity lymphedema after COVID-19 vaccination in two patients with a history of cervical cancer. An 82-year-old woman and a 68-year-old woman visited the outpatient clinic with unilateral leg edema after receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccine (BNT162b2; Pfizer-BioNTech) in the deltoid muscle. Both patients had a common history of cervical cancer treated with surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy and were in complete remission. Gynecological evaluations, including laboratory and imaging studies, revealed no specific findings. Lymphoscintigraphy revealed delayed lymphatic drainage with diffuse dermal backflow in a unilateral lower extremity. This case series explores adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccination in patients who are at high risk of developing lymphedema, providing novel data for similar clinical presentations.

Purpose: This report offers a detailed examination of the inception and current state of the Heavy-ion Therapy Center (HITC) at the Yonsei Cancer Center (YCC), setting it apart as the world’s first center equipped with a fixed beam and two superconducting gantries for carbon-ion radiation therapy (CIRT). Materials and Methods: Preparations for CIRT at YCC began in 2013; accordingly, this center has completed a decade of meticulous planning and culminating since the operational commencement of the HITC in April 2023. Results: This report elaborates on the clinical preparation for adopting CIRT in Korea. It includes an extensive description of HITC’s facility layout at YCC, which comprises the accelerator and treatment rooms. Furthermore, this report delineates the clinical workflow, criteria for CIRT application, and the rigorous quality assurance processes implemented at YCC. It highlights YCC’s sophisticated radiation therapy infrastructure, collaborative initiatives, and the efficacious treatment of >200 prostate cancer cases utilizing CIRT. Conclusion This manuscript concludes by discussing the prospective influence of CIRT on the medical domain within Korea, spotlighting YCC’s pioneering contribution and forecasting the widespread integration of this groundbreaking technology.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.

In the 2023 series, we summarized the major clinical research advances in gynecologic oncology based on communications at the conference of Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology Review Course. The review consisted of 1) Endometrial cancer: immune checkpoint inhibitor, antibody drug conjugates (ADCs), selective inhibitor of nuclear export, CDK4/6 inhibitors WEE1 inhibitor, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. 2) Cervical cancer: surgery in low-risk early-stage cervical cancer, therapy for locally advanced stage and advanced, metastatic, or recurrent setting; and 3) Ovarian cancer: immunotherapy, triplet therapies using immune checkpoint inhibitors along with antiangiogenic agents and PARP inhibitors, and ADCs. In 2023, the field of endometrial cancer treatment witnessed a landmark year, marked by several practice-changing outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors and the reliable efficacy of PARP inhibitors and ADCs.

Objective: We aimed to revalidate the chemotherapy response score (CRS) system as a prognostic factor for ovarian cancer patients with breast cancer gene (BRCA) mutations or those receiving frontline poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors or bevacizumab as maintenance therapy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using medical records of patients with high-grade serous carcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery between January 2007 and December 2021 at 5 tertiary medical institutions in South Korea. At each hospital, pathologists independently assessed each slide of omental tissues obtained from surgery using the CRS system. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) values were obtained using Kaplan-Meier analysis to evaluate the effect of BRCA mutation, maintenance therapy, and CRS on survival time. Results: Of 466 patients, BRCA mutations were detected in 156 (33.5%) and 131 (28.1%) were treated with maintenance therapy; 98 (21.0%) and 42 (9.0%) were treated with PARP inhibitors or bevacizumab, respectively. Patients with CRS3 had significantly longer PFS than those with CRS1 or 2 (24.7 vs. 16.8 months, p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in PFS improvement between CRS3 patients and those with CRS1 or 2 with BRCA mutation (22.0 vs. 19.3 months, p=0.193). Moreover, no significant PFS prolongation was observed in CRS3 patients compared to CRS1 or 2 patients treated with PARP inhibitors or bevacizumab (24.3 vs. 22.4 months, p=0.851; 27.5 vs. 15.7 months, p=0.347, respectively). Conclusion CRS may not be a prognostic factor in patients with BRCA mutations and those receiving frontline maintenance therapy.

Background/Aims: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.

Background/Aims: In 2019, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) established clinical predictors for choledocholithiasis. Our study was designed to evaluate these predictors within the Korean clinical context, establish cutoff values, and develop a predictive model. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The relationships between choledocholithiasis and predictors including age, blood tests, and imaging findings were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We established Korean cutoff values for these predictors and developed a scoring system for choledocholithiasis using a multivariate logistic regression. The performance of this scoring system was then compared with that of the 2019 ASGE guidelines through a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: We established Korean cutoff values for age (>70 years), alanine aminotransferase (>26.5 U/L), aspartate aminotransferase (>28.5 U/L), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT; >82.5 U/L), alkaline phosphatase (ALP; >77.5 U/L), and total bilirubin (>0.95 mg/dL). In the multivariate analysis, only age >70 years, GGT >77.5 U/L, ALP >77.5 U/L, and common bile duct dilatation remained significant. We then developed a new Korean risk stratification model from the multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.777 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.81).Our model was stratified into the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups with the scores being <1.0, 1.0–5.5, and >5.5, respectively. Conclusions Predictors of choledocholithiasis in cholecystectomy patients and their cutoff values in Korean should be adjusted and further studies are needed to develop appropriate guidelines.