Purpose: To investigate ocular manifestation of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) in HIV patients after starting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and its relationship to T cell immunity. Methods: HIV patients with ocular IRIS after HAART were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical presentations with previous opportunistic infection, duration from initiation of HAART to IRIS, blood CD4+, CD8+ T cell count, and HIV RNA copies before HAART and at IRIS were analyzed. Results: Among 19 patients (27 eyes) included, the most common previous opportunistic infection was cytomegalovirus (17 patients, 89.5%) followed by tuberculosis choroiditis (2 patients, 10.5%). The clinical manifestations included vitritis (20 eyes, 74.0%), retinitis (14 eyes, 51.9%), and anterior uveitis (5 eyes, 18.5%). The median duration from initiation of HAART to IRIS was 70 days. CD4+ T cell count before HAART increased at IRIS (p < 0.001). CD8+ T cell count before HAART was negatively correlated with duration from HAART to IRIS (p < 0.001). The cutoff value of CD8+ T cell count for discerning early or late onset of ocular IRIS was 258/mm3 (p = 0.001). When divided into two groups by CD8+ T cell count of 258/mm3, 90% patients with CD8+ T cell count higher than 258/mm3 before HAART developed ocular IRIS within 70 days. Conclusions There was a negative relationship between CD8+ T cell count before HAART and duration from HAART to ocular IRIS. Ocular IRIS with higher CD8+ T cell count before HAART developed earlier after HAART initiation compared to those with lower CD8+ T cell count.

Intractable bleeding from locally advanced breast carcinoma is a rare but challenging clinical problem. Given the patients’ poor overall condition and palliative care status, management options are often limited. Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) emerges as a potential alternative to traditional surgical or radiation-based approaches for hemorrhage control. This case report presents a successful application of TAE in managing spontaneous bleeding from a locally advanced breast cancer.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: This study aimed to validate pivotal pre-test probability (PTP)-coronary artery disease (CAD) models (CAD consortium model and IJC-CAD model). Materials and Methods: Traditional PTP models-CAD consortium models: two traditional PTP models were used under the CAD consortium framework, namely CAD1 and CAD2. Machine learning (ML)-based PTP models: two ML-based PTP models were derived from CAD1 and CAD2, and used to enhance predictive capabilities [ML-CAD2 and ML-IJC (IJC-CAD)]. The primary endpoint was obstructive CAD. The performance evaluation of these PTP models was conducted using receiver-operating characteristic analysis. Results: The study included 238 participants, among whom 157 individuals (65.9% of the total sample) had CAD. The IJC-CAD model demonstrated the highest performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.860 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.812– 0.909]. Following this, the ML-CAD2 model exhibited an AUC of 0.814 (95% CI: 0.758–0.870), CAD1 showed an AUC of 0.767 (95% CI: 0.705–0.830), and CAD2 had an AUC of 0.785 (95% CI: 0.726–0.845). Each of the PTP models was adjusted to have a CAD score cutoff that classified cases with a sensitivity of over 95%. The respective cutoff values were as follows: CAD1 and CAD2 >12, MLCAD2 >0.380, and IJC-CAD >0.367. All PTP models achieved a CAD sensitivity of over 95%. Similar to the AUC performance, the accuracy of the PTP models was highest for IJC-CAD, reaching 80.3%. The accuracy of ML-CAD2 was 77.7%, while that for CAD1 and CAD2 was 74.8% and 75.2%, respectively. Conclusion ML-CAD2 and IJC-CAD showed superior performance compared to traditional existing models (CAD1 and CAD2)

Purpose: To investigate ocular manifestation of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) in HIV patients after starting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and its relationship to T cell immunity. Methods: HIV patients with ocular IRIS after HAART were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical presentations with previous opportunistic infection, duration from initiation of HAART to IRIS, blood CD4+, CD8+ T cell count, and HIV RNA copies before HAART and at IRIS were analyzed. Results: Among 19 patients (27 eyes) included, the most common previous opportunistic infection was cytomegalovirus (17 patients, 89.5%) followed by tuberculosis choroiditis (2 patients, 10.5%). The clinical manifestations included vitritis (20 eyes, 74.0%), retinitis (14 eyes, 51.9%), and anterior uveitis (5 eyes, 18.5%). The median duration from initiation of HAART to IRIS was 70 days. CD4+ T cell count before HAART increased at IRIS (p < 0.001). CD8+ T cell count before HAART was negatively correlated with duration from HAART to IRIS (p < 0.001). The cutoff value of CD8+ T cell count for discerning early or late onset of ocular IRIS was 258/mm3 (p = 0.001). When divided into two groups by CD8+ T cell count of 258/mm3, 90% patients with CD8+ T cell count higher than 258/mm3 before HAART developed ocular IRIS within 70 days. Conclusions There was a negative relationship between CD8+ T cell count before HAART and duration from HAART to ocular IRIS. Ocular IRIS with higher CD8+ T cell count before HAART developed earlier after HAART initiation compared to those with lower CD8+ T cell count.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare mesenchymal neoplasms that mainly occur in the stomach and small intestine; those arising in the esophagus are rarer. A 54-year-old woman was referred to our hospital with a one-month history of dysphagia. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), performed approximately five months earlier, had not revealed any specific findings. However, an EGD performed in our hospital showed the presence of a round, protruding lesion (approximately 40×30 mm in size), with a normal overlying mucosal surface, 35–39 cm from the upper incisor. Chest computed tomography (CT) revealed a large esophageal mass. Enucleation was performed on the esophageal mass, and a GIST was diagnosed using immunochemical staining. Imatinib mesylate administration was initiated two months postoperatively. The patient was stable, without any evident recurrence in the 8-month postoperative follow-up EGD and chest CT examinations. Therefore, physicians should consider that patients with worsening dysphagia may have an underlying organic condition, such as an acute increase in size of an esophageal GIST, even if recent examinations were unremarkable.

Background/Aims: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) frequently occurs in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly when influenced by factors such as abdominal infections, IBD flare-ups, or surgical procedures. The implications of PVT range from immediate issues such as intestinal ischemia to long-term concerns including portal hypertension and its complications. However, there is a notable gap in comprehensive studies on PVT in IBD, especially with the increasing incidence of IBD in Asia. This research aimed to evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of PVT in patients with IBD at a leading hospital in South Korea. Methods: This retrospective analysis reviewed adult patients diagnosed with both IBD and PVT from 1989 to 2021 at a renowned South Korean medical center. The study focused on patient characteristics, specifics of PVT, administered treatments, and outcomes, all confirmed through enhanced CT scans. Results: A total of 78 patients met the study’s criteria. Notably, only 20.5% (16/78) were treated with oral anticoagulants; however, a vast majority (96.2%; 75/78) achieved complete radiographic resolution (CRR). When comparing patients receiving anticoagulants to those who did not, a significant preference for anticoagulant use was observed in cases where the main portal vein was affected, as opposed to just the left or right veins (p = 0.006). However, multivariable analysis indicated that neither anticoagulant use nor previous surgeries significantly impacted CRR. Conclusions Patients with IBD and PVT generally had favorable outcomes, regardless of anticoagulant use.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: This study aimed to validate pivotal pre-test probability (PTP)-coronary artery disease (CAD) models (CAD consortium model and IJC-CAD model). Materials and Methods: Traditional PTP models-CAD consortium models: two traditional PTP models were used under the CAD consortium framework, namely CAD1 and CAD2. Machine learning (ML)-based PTP models: two ML-based PTP models were derived from CAD1 and CAD2, and used to enhance predictive capabilities [ML-CAD2 and ML-IJC (IJC-CAD)]. The primary endpoint was obstructive CAD. The performance evaluation of these PTP models was conducted using receiver-operating characteristic analysis. Results: The study included 238 participants, among whom 157 individuals (65.9% of the total sample) had CAD. The IJC-CAD model demonstrated the highest performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.860 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.812– 0.909]. Following this, the ML-CAD2 model exhibited an AUC of 0.814 (95% CI: 0.758–0.870), CAD1 showed an AUC of 0.767 (95% CI: 0.705–0.830), and CAD2 had an AUC of 0.785 (95% CI: 0.726–0.845). Each of the PTP models was adjusted to have a CAD score cutoff that classified cases with a sensitivity of over 95%. The respective cutoff values were as follows: CAD1 and CAD2 >12, MLCAD2 >0.380, and IJC-CAD >0.367. All PTP models achieved a CAD sensitivity of over 95%. Similar to the AUC performance, the accuracy of the PTP models was highest for IJC-CAD, reaching 80.3%. The accuracy of ML-CAD2 was 77.7%, while that for CAD1 and CAD2 was 74.8% and 75.2%, respectively. Conclusion ML-CAD2 and IJC-CAD showed superior performance compared to traditional existing models (CAD1 and CAD2)

Background/Aims: Inaccurate prediction of lymph node metastasis (LNM) may lead to unnecessary surgery following endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed to validate the usefulness of artificial intelligence (AI) models for predicting LNM in patients with T1 CRC. Methods: We analyzed the clinical data, laboratory results, pathological reports, and endoscopic findings of patients who underwent radical surgery for T1 CRC. We developed AI models to predict LNM using four algorithms: regularized logistic regression classifier (RLRC), random forest classifier (RFC), CatBoost classifier (CBC), and the voting classifier (VC). Four histological factors and four endoscopic findings were included to develop AI models. Areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs) were measured to distinguish AI model performance in accordance with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum guidelines. Results: Among 1,386 patients with T1 CRC, 173 patients (12.5%) had LNM. The AUROC values of the RLRC, RFC, CBC, and VC models for LNM prediction were significantly higher (0.673, 0.640, 0.679, and 0.677, respectively) than the 0.525 suggested in accordance with the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum guidelines (vs RLRC, p<0.001; vs RFC, p=0.001; vs CBC, p<0.001; vs VC, p<0.001). The AUROC value was similar between T1 colon versus T1 rectal cancers (0.718 vs 0.615, p=0.700). The AUROC value was also similar between the initial endoscopic resection and initial surgery groups (0.581 vs 0.746, p=0.845). Conclusions AI models trained on the basis of endoscopic findings and pathological features performed well in predicting LNM in patients with T1 CRC regardless of tumor location and initial treatment method.