Objective: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy (ET) constitute the standard systemic treatment for estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, treatment responses remain heterogeneous, highlighting the need for reliable prognostic markers. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT findings in this setting. Materials and Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included patients with ER+/HER2- MBC who underwent18F-FDG PET/CT before initiating CDK4/6 inhibitors plus ET between 2018 and 2023. Maximum standardized uptake value(SUVmax), whole-body metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were measured. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated as the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively, using multivariable Cox models. PET parameters (SUVmax, MTV, and TLG) were analyzed as both continuous and dichotomized variables based on median values, adjusting for relevant clinical covariates. Results: Among the 374 patients, 82 (21.9%) presented with de novo metastatic disease, and 357 (95.5%) received CDK4/6 inhibitors as first-line therapy. In multivariable Cox analysis, all continuous PET parameters were independently associated with PFS (adjusted hazard ratio for SUVmax 1.05 [95% confidence interval 1.02–1.08]; log-transformed MTV 1.16 [1.08–1.25]; and log-transformed TLG 1.14 [1.07–1.23]) and OS (SUVmax 1.08 [1.04–1.11]; log-transformed MTV 1.24 [1.12–1.38]; and log-transformed TLG 1.22 [1.11–1.34]) with all P < 0.001. Results based on dichotomized PET parameters were similar to those obtained with continuous values: PFS (adjusted hazard ratio for SUVmax ≥ 7.6, 1.41 [1.08–1.85]; MTV ≥ 21.2 cm 3 , 1.41 [1.08–1.86]; and TLG ≥ 78.9, 1.51 [1.14–1.99]) with P ≤ 0.013 and OS (1.43 [1.01–2.04]; 1.84 [1.28– 2.66]; and 1.73 [1.20–2.50], respectively) with P ≤ 0.046. Conclusion Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters are independent prognostic markers in patients with ER+/HER2- MBC receiving CDK4/6 inhibitors with ET, supporting their potential utility in risk stratification.

Purpose: Based on the KEYNOTE-522 study, neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy has become the standard treatment for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).This study evaluated the real-world efficacy, safety, and predictors of pathologic complete response (pCR) in Korean patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 174 patients with early-stage TNBC who received the KEYNOTE-522 regimen (neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus paclitaxel and carboplatin, followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide) at a tertiary cancer center between August 2022 and July 2024. We assessed the primary endpoints, including pCR rate and event-free survival (EFS). We performed univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify independent predictors of pCR. Results: The median patient age was 50 years (range, 24–74 years). The clinical stages were II and III in 79.3% and 20.1% of patients, respectively, and 10.9% had clinical N3 disease. The overall pCR rate was 62.1%, and the N3 subgroup had a pCR rate of 47.4%. On multivariable analysis, high baseline Ki-67 expression (≥ median, 75%) was significantly associated with pCR (odds ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.45 to 5.66; p = 0.002). At a median followup of 18.4 months, the 12-month EFS rate was 97.4%, with significantly superior outcomes observed in patients who achieved pCR compared with those who did not achieve pCR (100% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.007). The treatment completion rate was 92.0%, and immune-related adverse events occurred in 13.8% of patients. Conclusion In this real-world analysis of one of the largest Asian cohorts of patients with earlystage TNBC treated with neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, the KEYNOTE-522 regimen demonstrated substantial efficacy and manageable toxicity, consistent with the original trial findings.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Purpose: Recent development in perioperative treatment of resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have changed the landscape of early lung cancer management. The ADAURA trial has demonstrated the efficacy of adjuvant osimertinib treatment in resectable NSCLC patients; however, studies are required to show which subgroup of patients are at a high risk of relapse and require adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. This study evaluated risk factors for postoperative relapse among patients who underwent complete resection. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Korean Association for Lung Cancer Registry (KALC-R), a database created using a retrospective sampling survey by the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR) and the Lung Cancer Registration Committee. Results: A total of 3,176 patients who underwent curative resection was evaluated. The mean observation time was approximately 35.4 months. Among stage I to IIIA NSCLC patients, the EGFR-mutant subgroup included 867 patients, and 75.2%, 11.2%, and 11.8% were classified as stage I, stage II, and stage III, respectively. Within the EGFR-mutant subgroup, 44 (5.1%) and 121 (14.0%) patients showed early and late recurrence, respectively. Multivariate analysis on association with postoperative relapse among the EGFR-mutant subgroup showed that age, pathologic N and TNM stages, pleural invasion status, and surgery type were independent significant factors. Conclusion Among the population that underwent complete resection for early NSCLC with EGFR mutation, patients with advanced stage, pleural invasion, or limited resection are more likely to show postoperative relapse.

Purpose: Recent development in perioperative treatment of resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have changed the landscape of early lung cancer management. The ADAURA trial has demonstrated the efficacy of adjuvant osimertinib treatment in resectable NSCLC patients; however, studies are required to show which subgroup of patients are at a high risk of relapse and require adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. This study evaluated risk factors for postoperative relapse among patients who underwent complete resection. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Korean Association for Lung Cancer Registry (KALC-R), a database created using a retrospective sampling survey by the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR) and the Lung Cancer Registration Committee. Results: A total of 3,176 patients who underwent curative resection was evaluated. The mean observation time was approximately 35.4 months. Among stage I to IIIA NSCLC patients, the EGFR-mutant subgroup included 867 patients, and 75.2%, 11.2%, and 11.8% were classified as stage I, stage II, and stage III, respectively. Within the EGFR-mutant subgroup, 44 (5.1%) and 121 (14.0%) patients showed early and late recurrence, respectively. Multivariate analysis on association with postoperative relapse among the EGFR-mutant subgroup showed that age, pathologic N and TNM stages, pleural invasion status, and surgery type were independent significant factors. Conclusion Among the population that underwent complete resection for early NSCLC with EGFR mutation, patients with advanced stage, pleural invasion, or limited resection are more likely to show postoperative relapse.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Purpose: Recent development in perioperative treatment of resectable non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have changed the landscape of early lung cancer management. The ADAURA trial has demonstrated the efficacy of adjuvant osimertinib treatment in resectable NSCLC patients; however, studies are required to show which subgroup of patients are at a high risk of relapse and require adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. This study evaluated risk factors for postoperative relapse among patients who underwent complete resection. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Korean Association for Lung Cancer Registry (KALC-R), a database created using a retrospective sampling survey by the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR) and the Lung Cancer Registration Committee. Results: A total of 3,176 patients who underwent curative resection was evaluated. The mean observation time was approximately 35.4 months. Among stage I to IIIA NSCLC patients, the EGFR-mutant subgroup included 867 patients, and 75.2%, 11.2%, and 11.8% were classified as stage I, stage II, and stage III, respectively. Within the EGFR-mutant subgroup, 44 (5.1%) and 121 (14.0%) patients showed early and late recurrence, respectively. Multivariate analysis on association with postoperative relapse among the EGFR-mutant subgroup showed that age, pathologic N and TNM stages, pleural invasion status, and surgery type were independent significant factors. Conclusion Among the population that underwent complete resection for early NSCLC with EGFR mutation, patients with advanced stage, pleural invasion, or limited resection are more likely to show postoperative relapse.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.