Purpose: The treatment of male breast cancer (MBC) has been extrapolated from female breast cancer (FBC) because of its rarity despite their different clinicopathologic characteristics. We aimed to investigate the distribution of intrinsic subtypes based on immunohistochemistry, their clinical impact, and treatment pattern in clinical practice through a multicenter study in Korea. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 248 MBC patients from 18 institutions across the country from January 1995 to July 2016. Results: The median age of MBC patients was 63 years (range, 25 to 102 years). Among 148 intrinsic subtype classified patients, 61 (41.2%), 44 (29.7%), 29 (19.5%), and 14 (9.5%) were luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and triple-negative breast cancer, respectively. Luminal A subtype showed trends for superior survival compared to other subtypes. Most hormone receptor-positive patients (166 patients, 82.6%) received adjuvant endocrine treatment. Five-year completion of adjuvant endocrine treatment was associated with superior disease-free survival (DFS) in patients classified with an intrinsic subtype (hazard ratio [HR], 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.49; p=0.002) and in all patients (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.54; p=0.003). Conclusion Distribution of subtypes of MBC was similar to FBC and luminal type A was most common. Overall survival tended to be improved for luminal A subtype, although there was no statistical significance. Completion of adjuvant endocrine treatment was associated with prolonged DFS in intrinsic subtype classified patients. MBC patients tended to receive less treatment. MBC patients should receive standard treatment according to guidelines as FBC patients.

Purpose: To establish a prospective registry for the active surveillance (AS) of prostate cancer (PC) using the Korean Urological Oncology Society (KUOS) database and to present interim analysis. Materials and Methods: The KUOS registry of AS for PC (KUOS-AS-PC) was organized in May 2019 and comprises multiple institutions nationwide. The eligibility criteria were as follows: patients with (1) pathologically proven PC; (2) pre-biopsy prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤20 ng/mL; (3) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 1 or 2 (no cribriform pattern 4); (4) clinical T stage ≤T2c; (5) positive core ratio ≤50%; and (6) maximal cancer involvement in the core ≤50%.Detailed longitudinal clinical information, including multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging and disease-specific outcomes, was recorded. Results: From May 2019 to June 2021, 296 patients were enrolled, and 284 were analyzed. The mean±standard deviation (SD) age at enrollment was 68.7±8.2 years. The median follow-up period was 11.2 months (5.9–16.8 mo). Majority of patients had pre-biopsy PSA ≤10 ng/mL (91.2%), PSA density <0.2 ng/mL 2 (79.7%), ISUP grade group 1 (94.4%), single positive core (65.7%), maximal cancer involvement in the core ≤20% (78.1%), and clinical T stage of T1c or lower (72.9%). Fifty-two (18.3%) discontinued AS for various reasons. Interventions included radical prostatectomy (80.8%), transurethral prostatectomy (5.8%), primary androgen deprivation therapy (5.8%), radiation (5.8%), and focal therapy (1.9%). The mean±SD time to intervention was 8.9±5.2 months. The reasons for discontinuation included pathologic reclassification (59.6%), patient preference (25.0%), and radiologic reclassification (9.6%). Two (4.8%) patients with pathologic Gleason score upgraded to ISUP grade group 4, no biochemical recurrence. Conclusions The KUOS established a successful prospective database of PC patients undergoing AS in Korea, named the KUOS-AS-PC registry.

Background/Aims: Although many studies have reported the promising effect of neoadjuvant treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) to increase resectability, only a few studies have recommended the use of first-line chemotherapeutic agents as neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC. The current study compared clinical outcomes between gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) in patients with BRPC. Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, 100 BRPC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection from 2008 to 2018 were reviewed. Clinical outcomes included overall survival, resectability, and recurrence patterns after gemcitabine or FOLFIRINOX treatment. Results: For neoadjuvant chemotherapy, gemcitabine was administered to 34 patients and FOLFIRINOX to 66. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was administered to 27 patients (79.4%) treated with gemcitabine and 19 (28.8%) treated with FOLFIRINOX (p<0.001). The 2- and 5-year survival rates (YSRs) were significantly higher after FOLFIRINOX (2YSR, 72.2%; 5YSR, 46.0%) than after gemcitabine (2YSR, 58.4%; 5YSR, 19.1%; p=0.041). The margin negative rate was comparable (gemcitabine, 94.1%; FOLFIRINOX, 92.4%; p=0.753), and the tumor size change in percentage showed only a marginal difference (gemcitabine, 20.5%; FOLFIRINOX, 29.0%; p=0.069). Notably, the metastatic recurrence rate was significantly lower in the FOLFIRINOX group (n=20, 52.6%) than in the gemcitabine group (n=22, 78.6%; p=0.001). The rate of adverse events after chemotherapy was significantly higher with FOLFIRINOX than with gemcitabine (43.9%, 20.6%, respectively; p=0.037). Conclusions FOLFIRINOX provided more clinical and oncological benefit than gemcitabine, with significantly higher overall survival and lower cumulative recurrence rates in BRPC. However, since FOLFIRINOX causes more adverse effects, the regimen should be individualized based on patient’s general condition and clinical status.

Purpose: Diagnostic biomarkers of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have been used for early detection to reduce its dismal survival rate. However, clinically feasible biomarkers are still rare. Therefore, in this study, we developed an automated multi-marker enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit using 3 biomarkers (leucine-rich alpha-2-glycoprotein [LRG1], transthyretin [TTR], and CA 19-9) that were previously discovered and proposed a diagnostic model for PDAC based on this kit for clinical usage. Methods: Individual LRG1, TTR, and CA 19-9 panels were combined into a single automated ELISA panel and tested on 728 plasma samples, including PDAC (n = 381) and normal samples (n = 347). The consistency between individual panels of 3 biomarkers and the automated multi-panel ELISA kit were accessed by correlation. The diagnostic model was developed using logistic regression according to the automated ELISA kit to predict the risk of pancreatic cancer (high-, intermediate-, and low-risk groups). Results: The Pearson correlation coefficient of predicted values between the triple-marker automated ELISA panel and the former individual ELISA was 0.865. The proposed model provided reliable prediction results with a positive predictive value of 92.05%, negative predictive value of 90.69%, specificity of 90.69%, and sensitivity of 92.05%, which all simultaneously exceed 90% cutoff value. Conclusion This diagnostic model based on the triple ELISA kit showed better diagnostic performance than previous markers for PDAC. In the future, it needs external validation to be used in the clinic.

Background/Aims: Although many studies have reported the promising effect of neoadjuvant treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) to increase resectability, only a few studies have recommended the use of first-line chemotherapeutic agents as neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC. The current study compared clinical outcomes between gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) in patients with BRPC. Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, 100 BRPC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection from 2008 to 2018 were reviewed. Clinical outcomes included overall survival, resectability, and recurrence patterns after gemcitabine or FOLFIRINOX treatment. Results: For neoadjuvant chemotherapy, gemcitabine was administered to 34 patients and FOLFIRINOX to 66. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was administered to 27 patients (79.4%) treated with gemcitabine and 19 (28.8%) treated with FOLFIRINOX (p<0.001). The 2- and 5-year survival rates (YSRs) were significantly higher after FOLFIRINOX (2YSR, 72.2%; 5YSR, 46.0%) than after gemcitabine (2YSR, 58.4%; 5YSR, 19.1%; p=0.041). The margin negative rate was comparable (gemcitabine, 94.1%; FOLFIRINOX, 92.4%; p=0.753), and the tumor size change in percentage showed only a marginal difference (gemcitabine, 20.5%; FOLFIRINOX, 29.0%; p=0.069). Notably, the metastatic recurrence rate was significantly lower in the FOLFIRINOX group (n=20, 52.6%) than in the gemcitabine group (n=22, 78.6%; p=0.001). The rate of adverse events after chemotherapy was significantly higher with FOLFIRINOX than with gemcitabine (43.9%, 20.6%, respectively; p=0.037). Conclusions FOLFIRINOX provided more clinical and oncological benefit than gemcitabine, with significantly higher overall survival and lower cumulative recurrence rates in BRPC. However, since FOLFIRINOX causes more adverse effects, the regimen should be individualized based on patient’s general condition and clinical status.

Background/Aims: The controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), based on transient elastography, is widely used for noninvasive assessment of the degree of hepatic steatosis (HS). We investigated the correlation of the degree HS between CAP and ultrasound (US) in patients with HS. Methods: In total, 986 patients with US-based HS who underwent transient elastography within 1 month were evaluated. The US-based grade of HS was categorized as mild (grade 1), moderate (grade 2), or severe (grade 3). Results: The CAP was significantly correlated with the US-based grade of HS (r = 0.458, p < 0.001). The median CAP value of each US-based HS grade showed a positive correlation with grade (271.1, 303.7, and 326.7 dB/m for grades 1, 2, and 3). In a multivariate analysis, the US-based HS grade, body mass index, serum albumin, alanine aminotransferase, and total cholesterol, and liver stiffness were all significantly correlated with the CAP value (all p < 0.05). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for grade 2 to 3 and grade 3 HS were 0.749 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.714 to 0.784) and 0.738 (95% CI, 0.704 to 0.772). The optimal cut-off CAP values to maximize the sum of the sensitivity and specificity for grade 2 to 3 and grade 3 HS were 284.5 dB/m (sensitivity 78.6%, specificity 61.7%) and 298.5 dB/m (sensitivity 84.6%, specificity 55.6%). Conclusions The correlation of the degree of HS between CAP and US was significantly high in patients with HS, and the optimal cut-off CAP values for grade 2 to 3 and grade 3 HS were 284.5 and 298.5 dB/m.