Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Intervertebral disc degeneration is associated with diverse spine diseases, including spinal stenosis, facet arthropathy, and disc herniation, which have socio-economic effects. A normal intervertebral disc has consistency and homeostasis, consisting of annulus fibrosus, nucleus pulposus, notochordal cells, nucleus pulposus cells, and an endplate with an immune privilege. On the other hand, when the degenerative process has pathologic causes, the inflammatory reaction could lead to nerve sprouting and vascularization into the tissue. Histopathologically, the pathologic process involves the degradation of the extracellular matrix, apoptosis and necrosis of nucleus pulposus cells, inhibition of chondrogenic differentiation, disruption of endplate chondrogenic cells, and other processes. Various approaches for managing disc degeneration have been reported. Among them, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been regarded as representative trials. In vitro and animal studies with MSCs have reported some promising outcomes in terms of inflammatory modulation and regeneration, but several limitations have been pointed out, including the issues of graft rejection and survival. Because the paracrine mechanism would be a main therapeutic factor of MSCs, extracellular vesicles (EVs), one of the factors released from MSCs, have been considered a promising source for regenerative medicine. EVs possess nucleic acids, functional proteins, and inflammation-related factors, playing a significant role in the inflammatory reaction and regeneration. The current review article discusses the pathophysiology of disc degeneration, outcomes of conventional MSCs and EVs, and current limitations and future perspectives on EV therapeutics.

Intervertebral disc degeneration is associated with diverse spine diseases, including spinal stenosis, facet arthropathy, and disc herniation, which have socio-economic effects. A normal intervertebral disc has consistency and homeostasis, consisting of annulus fibrosus, nucleus pulposus, notochordal cells, nucleus pulposus cells, and an endplate with an immune privilege. On the other hand, when the degenerative process has pathologic causes, the inflammatory reaction could lead to nerve sprouting and vascularization into the tissue. Histopathologically, the pathologic process involves the degradation of the extracellular matrix, apoptosis and necrosis of nucleus pulposus cells, inhibition of chondrogenic differentiation, disruption of endplate chondrogenic cells, and other processes. Various approaches for managing disc degeneration have been reported. Among them, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been regarded as representative trials. In vitro and animal studies with MSCs have reported some promising outcomes in terms of inflammatory modulation and regeneration, but several limitations have been pointed out, including the issues of graft rejection and survival. Because the paracrine mechanism would be a main therapeutic factor of MSCs, extracellular vesicles (EVs), one of the factors released from MSCs, have been considered a promising source for regenerative medicine. EVs possess nucleic acids, functional proteins, and inflammation-related factors, playing a significant role in the inflammatory reaction and regeneration. The current review article discusses the pathophysiology of disc degeneration, outcomes of conventional MSCs and EVs, and current limitations and future perspectives on EV therapeutics.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Intervertebral disc degeneration is associated with diverse spine diseases, including spinal stenosis, facet arthropathy, and disc herniation, which have socio-economic effects. A normal intervertebral disc has consistency and homeostasis, consisting of annulus fibrosus, nucleus pulposus, notochordal cells, nucleus pulposus cells, and an endplate with an immune privilege. On the other hand, when the degenerative process has pathologic causes, the inflammatory reaction could lead to nerve sprouting and vascularization into the tissue. Histopathologically, the pathologic process involves the degradation of the extracellular matrix, apoptosis and necrosis of nucleus pulposus cells, inhibition of chondrogenic differentiation, disruption of endplate chondrogenic cells, and other processes. Various approaches for managing disc degeneration have been reported. Among them, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been regarded as representative trials. In vitro and animal studies with MSCs have reported some promising outcomes in terms of inflammatory modulation and regeneration, but several limitations have been pointed out, including the issues of graft rejection and survival. Because the paracrine mechanism would be a main therapeutic factor of MSCs, extracellular vesicles (EVs), one of the factors released from MSCs, have been considered a promising source for regenerative medicine. EVs possess nucleic acids, functional proteins, and inflammation-related factors, playing a significant role in the inflammatory reaction and regeneration. The current review article discusses the pathophysiology of disc degeneration, outcomes of conventional MSCs and EVs, and current limitations and future perspectives on EV therapeutics.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.