Background: The exposome encompasses all factors people encounter through life, with the skin constantly exposed. While particulate matter (PM) and sleep deprivation are known to contribute to barrier dysfunction, their combined effects remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the independent and combined effects of PM exposure and short-term sleep deprivation on skin barrier function. Methods: Forty healthy Korean women (aged 24–58 years) were enrolled in this study. Forearms were divided into 4 sites: control, PM exposure, sleep deprivation, and PM plus sleep deprivation. Parameters such as trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), hydration, elasticity, roughness, and redness were measured at baseline and post-exposure. RNA sequencing and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction were conducted on tape-stripped skin samples. Results: PM exposure significantly increased TEWL (+25.59%, p<0.01), roughness (+21.9%, p<0.01), and redness (+13.7%, p<0.0001) while reducing elasticity (−3.98%, p<0.01). Sleep deprivation modestly reduced elasticity (−1.39%, p<0.05) without affecting other parameters.Combined PM and sleep deprivation did not further exacerbate barrier dysfunction compared to PM alone. RNA sequencing revealed reduced FLG and LORICRIN expression and upregulated endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress markers (HSP90B1, CANX) in both PM and sleep deprivation conditions. Conclusion PM exposure impaired skin barrier function, while short-term sleep deprivation alone did not significantly affect the barrier, either independently or in combination with PM.However, it was observed that the sleep deprivation-only, while not directly causing barrier damage, induced changes in ER stress-related gene expression in tape-stripped skin samples, like the PM exposure-only. This suggests that such signaling pathways could potentially exacerbate skin barrier deterioration.

Purpose: This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed. Results: Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953). Conclusion Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed. Results: Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953). Conclusion Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: This study aimed to characterize the clinical patterns and severity of brain injury in neonates who survived extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy for acute respiratory failure during the neonatal period, to evaluate their short-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, and to identify the factors associated with these outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of neonates who survived ECMO between 2018 and 2024. Based on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, the patients were classified into two groups: no/mild and moderate/severe brain injury. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed at 12–40 months of age using the Bayley Scale of Infant Development II/III and/or the Korean Developmental Screening Test. Results: Among the 19 neonates included in the study, 18 (94.7%) showed varying degrees of brain injury on MRI (mild: 12, moderate: 1, severe: 5). Neonates with moderate/severe brain injury had significantly longer durations of ECMO support and extended durations of mechanical ventilation and were more likely to receive continuous renal replacement therapy than those with no or mild injury. Developmental delay was identified in 36.8% of survivors and was significantly associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer neonatal intensive care unit stays, and a higher incidence of seizures. Conclusion Brain injury is frequently observed on MRI in neonates treated with ECMO. However, its direct association with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes is not definitive. Since MRI findings alone cannot predict developmental outcomes, clinical and environmental factors should be integrated into prognostic assessments.

Purpose: This study aimed to characterize the clinical patterns and severity of brain injury in neonates who survived extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy for acute respiratory failure during the neonatal period, to evaluate their short-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, and to identify the factors associated with these outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of neonates who survived ECMO between 2018 and 2024. Based on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, the patients were classified into two groups: no/mild and moderate/severe brain injury. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed at 12–40 months of age using the Bayley Scale of Infant Development II/III and/or the Korean Developmental Screening Test. Results: Among the 19 neonates included in the study, 18 (94.7%) showed varying degrees of brain injury on MRI (mild: 12, moderate: 1, severe: 5). Neonates with moderate/severe brain injury had significantly longer durations of ECMO support and extended durations of mechanical ventilation and were more likely to receive continuous renal replacement therapy than those with no or mild injury. Developmental delay was identified in 36.8% of survivors and was significantly associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer neonatal intensive care unit stays, and a higher incidence of seizures. Conclusion Brain injury is frequently observed on MRI in neonates treated with ECMO. However, its direct association with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes is not definitive. Since MRI findings alone cannot predict developmental outcomes, clinical and environmental factors should be integrated into prognostic assessments.

Background: Syphilis, an infectious and chronic disease primarily transmitted through sexual contact, is caused by the spirochete bacterium Treponema pallidum. Although the introduction of penicillin has significantly reduced its incidence, syphilis continues to have a substantial impact on public health. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate trends in syphilis and to analyze its epidemiologic, clinical, and serologic characteristics. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 330 patients who tested positive for the Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) test, including 192 patients who received a diagnosis of syphilis and who visited the Dermatology Department of Gachon University Gil Medical Center between 2000 and 2023. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate trends in syphilis incidence and related variable factors, such as sex, age, and serological results. Results: The average age of the 192 syphilis patients was 34.18±15.81 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:1.2. The most prevalent age group was 20∼29 years, comprising 71 patients (37.0%). Over time, the incidence of syphilis demonstrated a decreasing trend (p＜0.001). A total of 105 patients (54.7%) were diagnosed with symptomatic syphilis, with a male-to-female ratio of 1.5:1. The proportion of symptomatic syphilis patients tended to decrease with increasing age (p＜0.05). Maculopapular syphilis was the most frequently observed presentation in secondary syphilis (36.2%). The proportion of symptomatic syphilis patients significantly increased with higher VDRL titers (p＜0.001). Conclusion The incidence of syphilis has shown a consistent decline over the past two decades. However, the relatively higher prevalence among younger age groups indicates the need for continued public health efforts.

Purpose: This study analyzed the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, long-term outcomes, and biological features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-zero, HER2-low, and HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: This single-center study included 1,667 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2008 to 2014. Patients were categorized by HER2 status, and their clinicopathological characteristics, chemotherapy responses, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were analyzed. Results: Patients with HER2-low tumors were more likely to be older (p = 0.081), have a lower histological grade (p < 0.001), and have hormone receptor (HorR)-positive tumors (p < 0.001). The HER2-positive group exhibited the highest pCR rate (23.3%), followed by the HER2-zero (15.5%) and HER2-low (10.9%) groups. However, the pCR rate did not differ between HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors in the HorR-positive or HorR-negative subgroups.The 5-year RFS rates increased in the following order: HER2-low, HER2-positive, and HER2-zero (80.0%, 77.5%, and 74.5%, respectively) (log-rank test p = 0.017). A significant survival difference between patients with HER2-low and HER2-zero tumors was only identified in HorR-negative tumors (5-year RFS for HER2-low, 74.5% vs. HER2-zero, 66.0%; log-rank test p-value = 0.04). Multivariate survival analysis revealed that achieving a pCR was the most significant factor associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.279; p < 0.001).Compared with HER2-zero, the HRs for HER2-low and HER2-positive tumors were 0.787 (p = 0.042) and 0.728 (p = 0.005), respectively. After excluding patients who received HER2-targeted therapy, patients with HER2-low tumors exhibited better RFS than those with HER2-zero (HR 0.784, p = 0.04), whereas those with HER2-positive tumors exhibited no significant difference compared with those with HER2-low tumors (HR, 0.975; p = 0.953). Conclusion Patients with HER2-low tumors had no significant difference in pCR rate compared to HER2-zero but showed better survival, especially in HorR-negative tumors.Further investigation into biological differences is warranted.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.