Purpose: While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head. Materials and Methods: We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens. Results: A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p=0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.03; p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy. Conclusion Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.

Purpose: While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head. Materials and Methods: We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens. Results: A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p=0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.03; p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy. Conclusion Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.

Purpose: While fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens are recommended second-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), there have been no studies comparing different regimens head-to-head. Materials and Methods: We performed individual patient-level meta-analysis based on data from the intention-to-treat population of the phase 2b NIFTY trial (liposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] plus fluorouracil and leucovorin [5-FU/LV] vs. 5-FU/LV; NCT03542508) and the phase 2 FIReFOX trial (modified oxaliplatin plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX] vs. modified irinotecan plus 5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI]; NCT03464968). Pairwise log-rank tests and multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling with shared frailty to account for the trial's effect were used to compare overall survival (OS) between regimens. Results: A total of 277 patients were included. The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group (n=88) showed significantly better OS compared to the mFOLFOX group (n=49, pairwise log-rank, p=0.02), and mFOLFIRI group (n=50, p=0.03). Multivariable analysis showed consistent trends in OS with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.39 (mFOLFOX vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 2.07; p=0.11) and 1.36 (mFOLFIRI vs. nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV: 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.03; p=0.13), respectively. Compared to the 5-FU/LV group, the mFOLFOX group and the mFOLFIRI group did not show differences in terms of OS (pairwise log-rank p=0.83 and p=0.58, respectively). The nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV group experienced more frequent diarrhea, while the mFOLFOX group experienced peripheral neuropathy. Conclusion Nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV showed favorable survival outcomes compared to mFOLFOX, mFOLFIRI, or 5-FU/LV. The safety profiles of these regimens should be considered along with efficacy.

Background: Humans are exposed to mercury primarily in its highly toxic form, methyl mercury, which is known to have adverse effects on various organs and systems. The negative impact of mercury exposure on the growth, development, and mental health of children, from infancy to adolescence, is well-documented. However, there are no internationally standardized safe limits for mercury exposure. This study investigated the impact of dietary habits and higher body mass index (BMI) on blood mercury levels in adolescents. Methods: This study analyzed the data from the 4th Korean National Environmental Health Survey (KoNEHS) 2018–2020. The focus was on 825 middle and high school students aged 13–18 years, whose blood mercury levels were measured. A survey on dietary and lifestyle habits was also conducted. Blood mercury levels were categorized by geometric median values, and associations with overweight status and seafood consumption were examined using a generalized linear model. Results: The geometric mean blood mercury level for the entire sample was 1.37 μg/L, with levels of 1.31 μg/L in normal-weight individuals and 1.43 μg/L in overweight individuals, showing a statistically significant difference between the two groups. After adjusting for other variables, blood mercury levels were significantly associated with overweight status (estimate: 0.084; p = 0.018; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.015–0.153), consumption of large fish and tuna more than once a week (estimate: 0.18; p = 0.001; 95% CI: 0.077–0.284), and consumption of fish once a week or more (estimate: 0.147; p = 0.004; 95% CI: 0.043–0.250). Conclusions In adolescents, a higher BMI and an increased consumption of large fish, tuna, and fish were associated with higher blood mercury levels. Notably, a stronger association was found between large fish consumption and blood mercury levels in the overweight group. These findings suggest the need to moderate seafood consumption and establish more proactive mercury exposure standards for adolescents.

Purpose: Small cell carcinoma of the genitourinary tract (GU SCC) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. There are only limited treatment options due to insufficient understanding of the disease. In this study, we analyzed the clinical outcomes of patients with GU SCC and their association with the tumor immune phenotype. Materials and Methods: Patients diagnosed with GU SCC were included. Survival outcomes according to the primary location (prostate and non-prostate) and stages (limited disease [LD] and extensive disease [ED]) were analyzed. We performed multiplex immunohistochemistry (IHC) in non-prostate SCC patients and analyzed the immune cell population. Results: A total of 77 patients were included in this study. Their median age was 71 years, 67 patients (87.0%) were male, and 48 patients (62.3%) had non-prostate SCC. All patients with ED (n=31, 40.3%) received etoposide plus platinum (EP) as initial treatment and median overall survival (OS) was 9.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.1 to 18.6). Patients with LD (n=46, 59.7%) received EP followed by radiotherapy or surgery, and 24-months OS rate was 63.6% (95% CI, 49.9 to 81.0). The multiplex IHC analysis of 21 patients with non-prostate SCC showed that patients with a higher density of programmed death-ligand 1–expressing CD68+CD206+ M2-like macrophages had significantly worse OS outcomes with an adjusted hazards ratio of 4.17 (95% CI, 1.25 to 14.29; adjusted p=0.02). Conclusion Patients with GU SCC had a poor prognosis, even those with localized disease. The tumor immune phenotypes were significantly associated with survival. This finding provides new insights for treating GU SCC.