Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to iodinated contrast media (ICM) can range from mild cutaneous symptoms to life-threatening anaphylaxis. In patients with a history of ICM hypersensitivity, avoidance of the culprit agent is generally recommended. This case report describes a successful desensitization in a 56-year-old man with recurrent HSRs to multiple agents including ioversol, iohexol, iobitridol, and iopamidol. Intradermal testing was performed to identify potentially safe alternatives; however, all tested agents, including iohexol, ioversol, iobitridol, iopamidol, iodixanol, iomeprol, and iopromide, yielded positive results. Given the clinical necessity of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, a 13-step rapid desensitization protocol with iodixanol was implemented. The procedure was completed without any breakthrough reactions. This case highlights desensitization as a feasible and effective strategy for patients with hypersensitivity to multiple ICM agents.

Purpose: While progesterone receptor (PR) negativity in luminal-type breast cancer is generally associated with worse oncologic outcomes, its prognostic role in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer remains underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of PR expression in ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients diagnosed with ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer who underwent primary surgery at Korea University Guro Hospital between January 2009 and December 2019. Patients were grouped by PR expression as negative/low (Allred score, 0–6) or strongly positive (Allred score,7 or 8). Prognostic outcomes, including disease-free survival (DFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were analyzed. Results: A total of 223 patients were included. Patients in the negative/low PR group were older compared to the strongly positive PR group. The negative/low PR group showed significantly worse DFS (P = 0.005) and DRFS (P = 0.014) but showed no significant difference in BCSS (P = 0.153). On multivariate analysis, negative or low PR expressions were linked to inferior DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34–7.16; P = 0.008) and DRFS (HR, 9.55; 95% CI, 1.22– 74.77; P = 0.032). Conclusion In ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer, negative or weak PR expression was associated with inferior DFS and DRFS compared to strong PR expression. These findings highlight the potential prognostic value of PR status in this group, underscoring its relevance in guiding treatment and follow-up strategies for more individualized patient care.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the detection ability of quality of life (QoL) changes and responsiveness of the KOrean QUality of life in Stomach cancer patients Study group (KOQUSS)-40 and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ). Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted to evaluate QoL changes after various gastrectomies between January 2021 and April 2022. Participants were instructed to complete the KOQUSS-40 and EORTC QLQ-C30/STO22 preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. QoL changes over time and QoL responsiveness were assessed for each questionnaire. Results: Data from 491 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer at 22 institutions were analyzed. The summary scores of the KOQUSS-40 and EORTC QLQ-STO22 showed significant differences between the total and proximal gastrectomy groups (p=0.044 and p=0.038, respectively), but no difference was observed for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Dysphagia on the KOQUSS-40 was significantly different between the total and proximal gastrectomy groups (p=0.031); however, dysphagia on the EORTC QLQ-STO22 did not differ. The responsiveness of the KOQUSS-40 was similar to that of the EORTC QLQ in patients who experienced ≥ 10% body weight loss, but approximately 10% less in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy than the EORTC QLQ. Conclusion KOQUSS-40 has several advantages over EORTC QLQ-C30/STO22 when comparing QoL between the total and proximal gastrectomy groups. The findings provide information for researchers investigating the QoL of patients who have undergone curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Purpose: The male predominance in the incidence of gastric cancer (GC) is established; however, sex differences in the prognosis of GC remain controversial. As such, this study analyzed the prognosis of patients with GC based on age and sex. Materials and Methods: Data from 14,739 patients diagnosed with GC at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between 2003 and 2023 were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, histological types of GC, overall and GC-specific survival rates (age and stage stratification), and associated risk factors were analyzed. Results: Females were significantly younger (p < 0.001) and exhibited more gastric body cancers (p < 0.001) and tumors with diffuse-type or poorly differentiated histology (p < 0.001) than males. Females exhibited an advantage over males in terms of overall survival (p=0.004), but not in GC-specific survival. However, age stratification revealed significant sex differences, that females < 50 years of age exhibited survival disadvantages (p < 0.001); however, this trend was reversed with age, and females > 60 years exhibited survival advantages (p < 0.001) for both overall and GC-specific survival. This may be explained by the lower ratio of diffuse-type GC as females age. Furthermore, in the analysis according to stage, females with stage IV disease exhibited significant survival disadvantages, with significantly younger age and a higher proportion of diffuse-type GC which exhibits aggressive features, resulting in poorer survival than in males. Conclusion Age and stage stratification revealed significant differences in survival between the sexes, which can be helpful for public health strategies.

Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with upfront FOLFIRINOX followed by local-regional therapy (LRT), surgical resection (SR), and radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to identify specific patient subgroups for which RT may serve as a reasonable alternative to SR for local tumor control. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients (SR group, n= 70; RT group, n= 46) at a single center between 2015 and 2020. Survival outcomes were compared based on LRT modalities, focusing on identifying subgroups in which RT provided an efficacy comparable to that of SR. Results: Among 116 patients, the SR group achieved a significantly higher 5-year overall survival (OS) than the RT group (27.1% vs. 8.7%, P< 0.0001), despite similar progression-free survival (P= 0.23). Significant prognostic factors for OS included carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response in BRPC (P= 0.02) and radiologic partial response in LAPC (P= 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that, while SR provided a survival advantage in CA19-9 responders, no significant difference in OS was observed between SR and RT in CA19-9 non-responders (P= 0.37). Conclusion Although surgery remains the gold standard, RT may be considered a justifiable local alternative for CA19-9 non-responders and surgically ineligible patients with LAPC, yielding comparable outcomes in these specific, biologically unfavorable subgroups.

Purpose: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis; however, the implementation of neoadjuvant treatment enables borderline resectable cases to undergo curative resection and improves the overall survival rate. Attempts have been made to expand the eligibility criteria for neoadjuvant treatment, even in resectable cases. Some studies have suggested a correlation between vein abutment and poor prognosis or that the abutment angle may affect prognosis. This study investigated the anatomical factors affecting the vessel abutment angle and its prognostic value in pancreatic cancer. Methods: Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2017 were included in this study. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. Data from only the intent-to-treat pancreaticoduodenectomy group were included in the analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics; preoperative factors such as CA 19-9, preoperative biliary drainage, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, portal vein/superior mesenteric vein contact angle measured via CT scan; and intraoperative factors were collected for analysis. Results: A total of 365 patients were included in this study, and the abutment group included 92 patients (25.2%). The abutment and no-contact groups did not show any significant differences in terms of the overall survival or diseasefree survival rate. Among the abutment groups, patients with less than 90° and 90°–180° did not show any significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, the only preoperative factor that had a prognostic effect was CA 19-9, a biological factor. Conclusion When there is no vessel invasion in the abutment group, upfront surgery should be considered because the angle does not affect the overall prognosis.

Purpose: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis; however, the implementation of neoadjuvant treatment enables borderline resectable cases to undergo curative resection and improves the overall survival rate. Attempts have been made to expand the eligibility criteria for neoadjuvant treatment, even in resectable cases. Some studies have suggested a correlation between vein abutment and poor prognosis or that the abutment angle may affect prognosis. This study investigated the anatomical factors affecting the vessel abutment angle and its prognostic value in pancreatic cancer. Methods: Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2017 were included in this study. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. Data from only the intent-to-treat pancreaticoduodenectomy group were included in the analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics; preoperative factors such as CA 19-9, preoperative biliary drainage, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, portal vein/superior mesenteric vein contact angle measured via CT scan; and intraoperative factors were collected for analysis. Results: A total of 365 patients were included in this study, and the abutment group included 92 patients (25.2%). The abutment and no-contact groups did not show any significant differences in terms of the overall survival or diseasefree survival rate. Among the abutment groups, patients with less than 90° and 90°–180° did not show any significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, the only preoperative factor that had a prognostic effect was CA 19-9, a biological factor. Conclusion When there is no vessel invasion in the abutment group, upfront surgery should be considered because the angle does not affect the overall prognosis.

Purpose: Developmentally regulated GTP-binding protein 2 (DRG2) regulates microtubule dynamics and G2/M arrest during docetaxel treatment. Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) acts as an important repair system for DNA damage caused by docetaxel treatment. This study investigated whether DRG2 expression affects response to PARP inhibitors (olaparib) using prostate cancer cell lines PC3, DU145, LNCaP-FGC, and LNCaP-LN3. Materials and Methods: The cell viability and DRG2 expression levels were assessed using colorimetric-based cell viability assay and western blot. Cells were transfected with DRG2 siRNA, and pcDNA6/V5-DRG2 was used to overexpress DRG2. Flow cytometry was applied for cell cycle assay and apoptosis analysis using the Annexing V cell death assay. Results: The expression of DRG2 was highest in LNCaP-LN3 and lowest in DU145 cells. Expressions of p53 in PC3, DU145, and the two LNCaP cell lines were null-type, high-expression, and medium-expression, respectively. In PC3 (DRG2 high, p53 null) cells, docetaxel increased G2/M arrest without apoptosis; however, subsequent treatment with olaparib promoted apoptosis. In DU145 and LNCaP-FGC (DRG2 low), docetaxel increased sub-G1 but not G2/M arrest and induced apoptosis, whereas olaparib had no additional effect. In LNCaP-LN3 (DRG2 high, p53 wild-type), docetaxel increased sub-G1 and G2/M arrest, furthermore olaparib enhanced cell death. Docetaxel and olaparib combination treatment had a slight effect on DRG2 knockdown PC3, but increased apoptosis in DRG2-overexpressed DU145 cells. Conclusions DRG2 and p53 expressions play an important role in prostate cancer cell lines treated with docetaxel, and DRG2 levels can predict the response to PARP inhibitors.