Purpose: This subgroup analysis of the Korean subset of patients in the phase 3 LASER301 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lazertinib versus gefitinib as first-line therapy for epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic EGFRm NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to lazertinib (240 mg/day) or gefitinib (250 mg/day). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: In total, 172 Korean patients were enrolled (lazertinib, n=87; gefitinib, n=85). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. One-third of patients had brain metastases (BM) at baseline. Median PFS was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.7 to 26.1) for lazertinib and 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.2 to 12.3) for gefitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.60). This was supported by PFS analysis based on blinded independent central review. Significant PFS benefit with lazertinib was consistently observed across predefined subgroups, including patients with BM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.53) and those with L858R mutations (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.63). Lazertinib safety data were consistent with its previously reported safety profile. Common adverse events (AEs) in both groups included rash, pruritus, and diarrhoea. Numerically fewer severe AEs and severe treatment–related AEs occurred with lazertinib than gefitinib. Conclusion Consistent with results for the overall LASER301 population, this analysis showed significant PFS benefit with lazertinib versus gefitinib with comparable safety in Korean patients with untreated EGFRm NSCLC, supporting lazertinib as a new potential treatment option for this patient population.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) provides high-resolution images and is superior to computed tomography (CT) scan in diagnosing small pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). As a result, the use of EUS for early detection of PDAC has attracted attention. This study aimed to identify the clinical and radiological characteristics of patients with PDAC diagnosed by EUS but not found on CT scan. Methods: The medical records of patients diagnosed with PDAC at 12 tertiary referral centers in Korea from January 2003 to April 2019 were reviewed. This study included patients with pancreatic masses not clearly observed on CT scan but identified on EUS. The clinical characteristics and radiological features of the patients were analyzed, and survival analysis was performed. Results: A total of 83 patients were enrolled. The most common abnormal CT findings other than a definite mass was pancreatic duct dilatation, which was identified in 61 patients (73.5%). All but four patients underwent surgery. The final pathologic stages were as follows: IA (n=31, 39.2%), IB (n=8, 10.1%), IIA (n=20, 25.3%), IIB (n=17, 21.5%), III (n=2, 2.5%), and IV (n=1, 1.4%). The 5-year survival rate of these patients was 50.6% (95% confidence interval, 38.8% to 66.7%). Elevated liver function testing and R1 resection emerged as significant predictors of mortality in the multivariable Cox regression analysis. Conclusions This multicenter study demonstrated favorable long-term prognosis in patients with PDAC diagnosed by EUS but indeterminate on CT scan. EUS should be considered for patients with suspected PDAC but indeterminate on CT scan.

Purpose: Nutritional status and support in critically ill patients are important factors in determining patient recovery and prognosis.The aim of this study was to analyze the early nutritional status and the methods of nutritional support in critically ill patients with acute poisoning and to evaluate the effect of nutritional status on prognosis. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in tertiary care teaching hospital from January 2018 to December 2020. in an emergency department of university hospital, 220 patients who were stayed more than 2 days of poisoning in intensive care unit were enrolled. Results: 155 (70.5%) of patients with acute poisoning had low-risk in nutritional risk screening (NRS). Patients with malignancy had higher NRS (low risk 5.2%, moderate risk 18.5%, high risk 13.2%, p=0.024). Patients of 91.4% supplied nutrition via oral route or enteral route. Parenteral route for starting method of nutritional support were higher in patients with acute poisoning of herbicide or pesticide (medicine 3.2%, herbicide 13.8%, pesticide 22.2%, p=0.000). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, herbicide or pesticide intoxication, higher risk in NRS and sequential organ failure assessment over 4.5 were affecting factor on poor recovery at discharge. Conclusion NRS in patients intoxicated with herbicide or pesticide were higher than that in patients intoxicated with medicine intoxication. Enteral nutrition in patients intoxicated with herbicide or pesticide was less common. Initial NRS was correlated with recovery at discharge in patient with intoxication. It is expected to be helpful in finding patients with high-risk nutritional status in acute poisoning patients and establishing a treatment plan that can actively implement nutritional support.

Astrocytes are activated in response to brain damage. Here, we found that expression of Kir4.1, a major potassium channel in astrocytes, is increased in activated astrocytes in the injured brain together with upregulation of the neural stem cell markers, Sox2 and Nestin. Expression of Kir4.1 was also increased together with that of Nestin and Sox2 in neurospheres formed from dissociated P7 mouse brains. Using the Kir4.1 blocker BaCl2 to determine whether Kir4.1 is involved in acquisition of stemness, we found that inhibition of Kir4.1 activity caused a concentration-dependent increase in sphere size and Sox2 levels, but had little effect on Nestin levels. Moreover, induction of differentiation of cultured neural stem cells by withdrawing epidermal growth factor and fibroblast growth factor from the culture medium caused a sharp initial increase in Kir4.1 expression followed by a decrease, whereas Sox2 and Nestin levels continuously decreased. Inhibition of Kir4.1 had no effect on expression levels of Sox2 or Nestin, or the astrocyte and neuron markers glial fibrillary acidic protein and β-tubulin III, respectively. Taken together, these results indicate that Kir4.1 may control gain of stemness but not differentiation of stem cells.

Purpose: Atropine is an antidote used to relieve muscarinic symptoms in patients with organophosphate and carbamate poisoning. Nutritional support via the enteral nutrition (EN) route might be associated with improved clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. This study examined the administration of nutritional support in patients undergoing atropinization, including methods of supply, outcomes, and complications. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital from 2010 to 2018. Forty-five patients, who were administered with atropine and on mechanical ventilation (MV) due to organophosphate or carbamate poisoning, were enrolled. Results: Nutritional support was initiated on the third day of hospitalization. Thirty-three patients (73.3%) were initially supported using parenteral nutrition (PN). During atropinization, 32 patients (71.1%) received nutritional support via EN (9) or PN (23). There was no obvious reason for not starting EN during atropinization (61.1%). Pneumonia was observed in both patient groups on EN and PN (p=0.049). Patients without nutritional support had a shorter MV duration (p=0.034) than patients with nutritional support.The methods of nutritional support during atropinization did not show differences in the number of hospital days (p=0.711), MV duration (p=0.933), duration of ICU stay (p=0.850), or recovery at discharge (p=0.197). Conclusion Most patients undergoing atropinization were administered PN without obvious reasons to preclude EN. Nutritional support was not correlated with the treatment outcomes or pneumonia. From these results, it might be possible to choose EN in patients undergoing atropinization, but further studies will be necessary.

Purpose: Atropine is an antidote used to relieve muscarinic symptoms in patients with organophosphate and carbamate poisoning. Nutritional support via the enteral nutrition (EN) route might be associated with improved clinical outcomes in critically ill patients. This study examined the administration of nutritional support in patients undergoing atropinization, including methods of supply, outcomes, and complications. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital from 2010 to 2018. Forty-five patients, who were administered with atropine and on mechanical ventilation (MV) due to organophosphate or carbamate poisoning, were enrolled. Results: Nutritional support was initiated on the third day of hospitalization. Thirty-three patients (73.3%) were initially supported using parenteral nutrition (PN). During atropinization, 32 patients (71.1%) received nutritional support via EN (9) or PN (23). There was no obvious reason for not starting EN during atropinization (61.1%). Pneumonia was observed in both patient groups on EN and PN (p=0.049). Patients without nutritional support had a shorter MV duration (p=0.034) than patients with nutritional support.The methods of nutritional support during atropinization did not show differences in the number of hospital days (p=0.711), MV duration (p=0.933), duration of ICU stay (p=0.850), or recovery at discharge (p=0.197). Conclusion Most patients undergoing atropinization were administered PN without obvious reasons to preclude EN. Nutritional support was not correlated with the treatment outcomes or pneumonia. From these results, it might be possible to choose EN in patients undergoing atropinization, but further studies will be necessary.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case analyses.PURPOSE: To investigate the causes, diagnosis, and management of esophageal perforation, depending on the time of diagnosis.OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: To date, few studies have addressed these issues.METHODS: A total of seven patients were included in this study. The patients were classified into three groups based on esophageal perforation diagnosis time: intraoperative (diagnosed during surgery), perioperative (diagnosed within 30 days postoperatively), and delayed (diagnosed >30 days postoperatively) groups.RESULTS: In the intraoperative group (N=2), infectious spondylitis was the main cause of esophageal perforation. Anterior plate and screw removal, followed by posterior instrumentation, was performed. The injured esophagus was managed by omentum flap repair in one patient and primary repair in one patient. In the perioperative group (N=2), revision surgery for infection and metal failure were the main causes of esophageal perforation. In both cases, food residue was drained on the third postoperative day. The injured esophagus was managed conservatively. In the delayed group (N=3), chronic irritation caused by metal failure was the main cause of esophageal perforation. In all patients, there was no associated infection. The anterior instrumentation was removed, and the two patients were treated by primary repair, and one patient was treated using sternocleidomastoid muscle flap. One patient in intraoperative group died of sepsis.CONCLUSIONS: The main cause of intraoperative esophageal perforation was esophageal adhesions because of infectious spondylitis. However, perioperative and delayed esophageal perforations were caused by chronic irritation because of metal failure. Anterior plate and screw removal was necessary, and posterior instrumentation and fusion may be considered, depending on the fusion status.
Diagnosis ; Esophageal Perforation ; Esophagus ; Humans ; Omentum ; Retrospective Studies ; Sepsis ; Spine ; Spondylitis

BACKGROUND: Although the use of postoperative opioids is a well-known risk factor for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), few studies have been performed on the effects of intraoperative opioids on PONV. We examined the effects of a single bolus administration of fentanyl during anesthesia induction and the intraoperative infusion of remifentanil on PONV. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty women, aged 20 to 65 years and scheduled for thyroidectomy, were allocated to a control group (Group C), a single bolus administration of fentanyl 2 microg/kg during anesthesia induction (Group F), or 2 ng/ ml of effect-site concentration-controlled intraoperative infusion of remifentanil (Group R) groups. Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and 50% N2O. The incidence and severity of PONV and use of rescue antiemetics were recorded at 2, 6, and 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS: Group F showed higher incidences of nausea (60/82, 73% vs. 38/77, 49%; P = 0.008), vomiting (40/82, 49% vs. 23/77 30%; P = 0.041) and the use of rescue antiemetics (47/82, 57% vs. 29/77, 38%; P = 0.044) compared with Group C at postoperative 24 h. However, there were no significant differences in the incidence of PONV between Groups C and R. The overall incidences of PONV for postoperative 24 h were 49%, 73%, and 59% in Groups C, F, and R, respectively (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: A single bolus administration of fentanyl 2 microg/kg during anesthesia induction increases the incidence of PONV, but intraoperative remifentanil infusion with 2 ng/ml effect-site concentration did not affect the incidence of PONV.
Analgesics, Opioid ; Anesthesia ; Antiemetics ; Female ; Fentanyl* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Intraoperative Period ; Nausea ; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting* ; Risk Factors ; Thyroidectomy ; Vomiting

No abstract available.
Infarction* ; Middle Cerebral Artery*