BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Dietary supplement use is common among breast cancer survivors, but studies on Asian populations remain limited. This study investigated dietary supplement use among Korean breast cancer survivors, distinguishing between vitamin/ mineral (VM) and non-vitaminon-mineral (NVNM) supplements. SUBJECTS/METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 1,136 stage I–III breast cancer survivors from 12 Korean hospitals, who survived more than 6 mon post-surgery. The participants completed a questionnaire on post-diagnostic dietary supplement use. Stepwise logistic regression was applied, calculating odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify the demographic and clinical factors associated with VM and NVNM use. RESULTS: Seventy percent of survivors reported supplement use, with 25% using a single product. The most common VM supplements were multivitamins/minerals, vitamin D, and vitamin C, while the most common NVNM supplements included omega-3 fatty acids, probiotics, and ginseng. Survivors with higher education and greater physical activity were more likely to use VM supplements (ORs [95% CIs], 2.74 [1.76–4.25] for college graduates or above vs. middle school or below; 1.38 [1.02–1.88] for the most active group vs. the least active group). NVNM use was associated with higher education, greater physical activity levels, and a history of smoking (ORs [95% CIs], 2.29 [1.46–3.58] for college graduates or above vs. middle school or below; 1.52 [1.13–2.06] for the most active group vs. the least active group; 2.00 [1.23–3.25] for ever smokers vs. never smokers). Survivors who had undergone chemotherapy were also more likely to use NVNM supplements than those who had not (OR [95% CI], 1.37 [1.02–1.84]). CONCLUSION Seventy percent of Korean breast cancer survivors used dietary supplements in this study. VM use was associated with higher education and physical activity, while higher NVNM use was associated with higher education, greater physical activity, a history of smoking, and chemotherapy.

Sleep–wake regulation is controlled by circadian and homeostatic processes, with adenosine acting as a key molecular mediator of homeostatic sleep pressure. Extracellular adenosine accumulates during wakefulness as a result of neuronal energy metabolism, particularly in the basal forebrain, and declines during recovery sleep, thereby reflecting the physiological need for sleep.The sleep-promoting effects of adenosine are mediated primarily by two G protein–coupled receptor subtypes, the adenosine A1 receptor and the adenosine A2A receptor. The adenosine A1 receptor, coupled to inhibitory Gi/o proteins and widely expressed in the cortex, hippocampus, thalamus, and basal forebrain, suppresses wake-promoting neuronal activity and facilitates slow-wave activity during non-rapid eye movement sleep. In contrast, the adenosine A2A receptor, coupled to stimulatory Golf proteins and enriched in the striatum and nucleus accumbens, promotes sleep by activating neurons in the preoptic hypothalamus and engaging the indirect basal ganglia pathway. Despite these well-established roles, the contributions of dysregulation of the adenosine A1 receptor and the adenosine A2A receptor to specific sleep disorders remain incompletely understood. This review examines how signaling of the adenosine A1 receptor and the adenosine A2A receptor is altered in insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea, narcolepsy, and restless legs syndrome, and evaluates the therapeutic potential of receptor-selective strategies for adenosine receptor–targeted treatment.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop an approach to alleviate the discomfort caused by sandbag compression after a bone marrow examination. This research examined the effects of applying a pressure hemostasis band on bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the bone marrow examination site. Methods: This study was conducted with a nonequivalent control group non-synchronized design. For 74 patients under evaluation who underwent bone marrow examination, sandbag compression was applied to the examination site in the control group (n=37), and a pressure hemostasis band was applied to the intervention group (n=37). In both groups, absolute bed rest was performed for two hours, and bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the examination site were measured. Results: After two hours of the bone marrow examination, there was no difference in bleeding on the gauze between the two groups (F=0.59, p=.444). Bleeding occurred in three patients in the intervention group and six in the control group (χ 2 =1.14, p=.479), with no cases of hematoma detected in either group. One hour post-examination, the control group experienced significantly higher pain (F=5.45, p=.022) and discomfort (F=5.68, p=.020) than the intervention group. However, pain and discomfort levels were similar between groups after two hours. Conclusion Compared to the sandbag compression group, the band application group showed no difference in bleeding and experienced less pain and discomfort at the examination site. This confirms that the pressure hemostasis band is a suitable alternative to sandbag compression in post-examination care.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Isoflavones are estrogen-like compounds found in plants and their health effects remain equivocal. We investigated dietary isoflavone intake and its associated factors in Korean breast cancer survivors, with a comparison to cancer-free women. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The usual dietary intake of breast cancer survivors (n = 981, mean age 52 yrs) in 9 hospitals between 2012 and 2019 was assessed using 3-day food records or food frequency questionnaires (FFQs). They were age-matched to 2,943 cancer-free women who completed FFQs as part of a nationwide study conducted between 2012 and 2016. We used the flavonoid database of common Korean foods and the Phenol-Explorer database to estimate isoflavone intake. The contribution of each food or food group to the total isoflavone intake was calculated. The adjusted least-squares means of dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle and clinical factors were calculated using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Breast cancer survivors had a higher mean dietary isoflavone intake (23.59 mg/day) than cancer-free women (17.81 mg/day). Major food sources, including tofu, soybeans, and doenjang, contributed to over 70% of the isoflavone intake in both groups. When we estimated dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle characteristics, isoflavone intake increased with higher scores of adherence to the American Cancer Society dietary guidelines but decreased with increasing body mass index in both groups. Among cancer-free women, dietary isoflavone intake was higher among those who had never smoked and among dietary supplement users. Among breast cancer survivors, dietary isoflavone intakes did not vary with clinical characteristics, including time since surgery and estrogen receptor status. CONCLUSION Breast cancer survivors were more likely to consume isoflavones than agematched cancer-free women. Dietary isoflavone intake was associated with healthy lifestyle characteristics in women both with and without breast cancer. Further research is needed to understand the role of the higher isoflavone intake among breast cancer survivors compared to cancer-free women on their prognosis.

Objective: Previous studies have reported an association between cancer-related symptoms and perceived social support (PSS). The objective of this study was to analyze whether Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN), a prevalent side effect of chemotherapy, varies according to PSS level using a validated tool for CIPN at prospective follow-up. Methods: A total of 39 breast cancer patients were evaluated for PSS using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) prior to chemotherapy and were subsequently grouped into one of two categories for each subscale: low-to-moderate PSS and high PSS. CIPN was prospectively evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy 20 (CIPN20) at five time points. A linear mixed-effects model with square root transformation was employed to investigate whether the CIPN20 scales varied by PSS level and time point. Results: Statistical analysis of the MSPSS total scale and subscales revealed a significant effect of the friends subscale group and time point on the CIPN20 sensory scale. The sensory scale score of CIPN20 was found to be lower in participants with high PSS from friends in comparison to those with low-to-moderate PSS at 1 month post-chemotherapy (p=0.010). Conclusion This is the first study to prospectively follow the long-term effect of pre-treatment PSS from friends on CIPN. Further studies based on larger samples are required to analyze the effects of PSS on the pathophysiology of CIPN.

Systemic corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of asthma. During acute exacerbation, the short-term use of systemic corticosteroids is recommended. For patients with uncontrolled asthma and severe asthma, long-term and low-dose oral corticosteroids (OCS) have frequently been advocated. However, both short-term and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids carry the risk of adverse events (AEs), including various morbidities and even mortality. Despite recent progress in adult severe asthma management and the availability of new treatment options, the current domestic guidelines for asthma do not provide specific recommendations for oral corticosteroid tapering in patients with severe asthma. Therefore, the task force team of the severe asthma working group in the Korean Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology has proposed a tapering protocol for systemic corticosteroid use in severe asthma. This includes practical recommendations for monitoring OCS-related AE, particularly for adrenal insufficiency and osteoporosis, which suggests corticosteroid-sparing strategies that include alternative therapies, modifying treatable traits, timely specialist assessment, and shared decision-making with patients. However, further real-world research and collaboration with doctors from primary and academic institutes, patients, and policymakers are necessary to establish an OCS stewardship approach. This should include realistic OCS-tapering strategies for patients with severe asthma using regular OCS, education, and campaigns for patients, the public, and healthcare providers about the burden of severe asthma, as well as improving timely access to specialized severe asthma services for optimal management.

Systemic corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of asthma. During acute exacerbation, the short-term use of systemic corticosteroids is recommended. For patients with uncontrolled asthma and severe asthma, long-term and low-dose oral corticosteroids (OCS) have frequently been advocated. However, both short-term and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids carry the risk of adverse events (AEs), including various morbidities and even mortality. Despite recent progress in adult severe asthma management and the availability of new treatment options, the current domestic guidelines for asthma do not provide specific recommendations for oral corticosteroid tapering in patients with severe asthma. Therefore, the task force team of the severe asthma working group in the Korean Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology has proposed a tapering protocol for systemic corticosteroid use in severe asthma. This includes practical recommendations for monitoring OCS-related AE, particularly for adrenal insufficiency and osteoporosis, which suggests corticosteroid-sparing strategies that include alternative therapies, modifying treatable traits, timely specialist assessment, and shared decision-making with patients. However, further real-world research and collaboration with doctors from primary and academic institutes, patients, and policymakers are necessary to establish an OCS stewardship approach. This should include realistic OCS-tapering strategies for patients with severe asthma using regular OCS, education, and campaigns for patients, the public, and healthcare providers about the burden of severe asthma, as well as improving timely access to specialized severe asthma services for optimal management.

Systemic corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of asthma. During acute exacerbation, the short-term use of systemic corticosteroids is recommended. For patients with uncontrolled asthma and severe asthma, long-term and low-dose oral corticosteroids (OCS) have frequently been advocated. However, both short-term and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids carry the risk of adverse events (AEs), including various morbidities and even mortality. Despite recent progress in adult severe asthma management and the availability of new treatment options, the current domestic guidelines for asthma do not provide specific recommendations for oral corticosteroid tapering in patients with severe asthma. Therefore, the task force team of the severe asthma working group in the Korean Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology has proposed a tapering protocol for systemic corticosteroid use in severe asthma. This includes practical recommendations for monitoring OCS-related AE, particularly for adrenal insufficiency and osteoporosis, which suggests corticosteroid-sparing strategies that include alternative therapies, modifying treatable traits, timely specialist assessment, and shared decision-making with patients. However, further real-world research and collaboration with doctors from primary and academic institutes, patients, and policymakers are necessary to establish an OCS stewardship approach. This should include realistic OCS-tapering strategies for patients with severe asthma using regular OCS, education, and campaigns for patients, the public, and healthcare providers about the burden of severe asthma, as well as improving timely access to specialized severe asthma services for optimal management.

Systemic corticosteroids play an essential role in the management of asthma. During acute exacerbation, the short-term use of systemic corticosteroids is recommended. For patients with uncontrolled asthma and severe asthma, long-term and low-dose oral corticosteroids (OCS) have frequently been advocated. However, both short-term and long-term use of systemic corticosteroids carry the risk of adverse events (AEs), including various morbidities and even mortality. Despite recent progress in adult severe asthma management and the availability of new treatment options, the current domestic guidelines for asthma do not provide specific recommendations for oral corticosteroid tapering in patients with severe asthma. Therefore, the task force team of the severe asthma working group in the Korean Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Clinical Immunology has proposed a tapering protocol for systemic corticosteroid use in severe asthma. This includes practical recommendations for monitoring OCS-related AE, particularly for adrenal insufficiency and osteoporosis, which suggests corticosteroid-sparing strategies that include alternative therapies, modifying treatable traits, timely specialist assessment, and shared decision-making with patients. However, further real-world research and collaboration with doctors from primary and academic institutes, patients, and policymakers are necessary to establish an OCS stewardship approach. This should include realistic OCS-tapering strategies for patients with severe asthma using regular OCS, education, and campaigns for patients, the public, and healthcare providers about the burden of severe asthma, as well as improving timely access to specialized severe asthma services for optimal management.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop an approach to alleviate the discomfort caused by sandbag compression after a bone marrow examination. This research examined the effects of applying a pressure hemostasis band on bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the bone marrow examination site. Methods: This study was conducted with a nonequivalent control group non-synchronized design. For 74 patients under evaluation who underwent bone marrow examination, sandbag compression was applied to the examination site in the control group (n=37), and a pressure hemostasis band was applied to the intervention group (n=37). In both groups, absolute bed rest was performed for two hours, and bleeding, pain, and discomfort at the examination site were measured. Results: After two hours of the bone marrow examination, there was no difference in bleeding on the gauze between the two groups (F=0.59, p=.444). Bleeding occurred in three patients in the intervention group and six in the control group (χ 2 =1.14, p=.479), with no cases of hematoma detected in either group. One hour post-examination, the control group experienced significantly higher pain (F=5.45, p=.022) and discomfort (F=5.68, p=.020) than the intervention group. However, pain and discomfort levels were similar between groups after two hours. Conclusion Compared to the sandbag compression group, the band application group showed no difference in bleeding and experienced less pain and discomfort at the examination site. This confirms that the pressure hemostasis band is a suitable alternative to sandbag compression in post-examination care.