BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Isoflavones are estrogen-like compounds found in plants and their health effects remain equivocal. We investigated dietary isoflavone intake and its associated factors in Korean breast cancer survivors, with a comparison to cancer-free women. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The usual dietary intake of breast cancer survivors (n = 981, mean age 52 yrs) in 9 hospitals between 2012 and 2019 was assessed using 3-day food records or food frequency questionnaires (FFQs). They were age-matched to 2,943 cancer-free women who completed FFQs as part of a nationwide study conducted between 2012 and 2016. We used the flavonoid database of common Korean foods and the Phenol-Explorer database to estimate isoflavone intake. The contribution of each food or food group to the total isoflavone intake was calculated. The adjusted least-squares means of dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle and clinical factors were calculated using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Breast cancer survivors had a higher mean dietary isoflavone intake (23.59 mg/day) than cancer-free women (17.81 mg/day). Major food sources, including tofu, soybeans, and doenjang, contributed to over 70% of the isoflavone intake in both groups. When we estimated dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle characteristics, isoflavone intake increased with higher scores of adherence to the American Cancer Society dietary guidelines but decreased with increasing body mass index in both groups. Among cancer-free women, dietary isoflavone intake was higher among those who had never smoked and among dietary supplement users. Among breast cancer survivors, dietary isoflavone intakes did not vary with clinical characteristics, including time since surgery and estrogen receptor status. CONCLUSION Breast cancer survivors were more likely to consume isoflavones than agematched cancer-free women. Dietary isoflavone intake was associated with healthy lifestyle characteristics in women both with and without breast cancer. Further research is needed to understand the role of the higher isoflavone intake among breast cancer survivors compared to cancer-free women on their prognosis.

This study aimed to investigate changes in candidemia incidence, species distribution, antifungal susceptibility, initial antifungal use, and mortality trends in Korea before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective analysis was conducted on candidemia cases from two tertiary care hospitals in Korea between 2017 and 2022. Data were compared between the pre-pandemic (2017-2019) and pandemic (2020-2022) periods. Statistical methods included incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and multivariate Cox regression to assess 30-day mortality risk factors. A total of 470 candidemia cases were identified, with 48.7% occurring pre-pandemic and 51.3% during the pandemic. While the overall incidence of candidemia remained similar across the two periods (IRR 1.15;p=0.13), the incidence in intensive care units (ICUs) significantly increased during the pandemic (IRR 1.50; p<0.01). The distribution of Candida species did not differ significantly between the two periods. Fluconazole non-susceptibility in C. albicans markedly decreased (10.0% vs. 0.9%, p<0.01), whereas C. glabrata exhibited a significant rise in caspofungin non-susceptibility during the pandemic (0% vs. 22.4%, p<0.01).Echinocandin use increased (21.8% vs. 34.4%; p<0.01), while fluconazole use declined (48.0% vs. 32.8%; p<0.01). Although the 30-day mortality rate was higher during the pandemic (60.2% vs. 57.2%), the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.57).The findings highlight the need for region-specific surveillance and tailored management strategies to improve candidemia outcomes, especially during healthcare disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Isoflavones are estrogen-like compounds found in plants and their health effects remain equivocal. We investigated dietary isoflavone intake and its associated factors in Korean breast cancer survivors, with a comparison to cancer-free women. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The usual dietary intake of breast cancer survivors (n = 981, mean age 52 yrs) in 9 hospitals between 2012 and 2019 was assessed using 3-day food records or food frequency questionnaires (FFQs). They were age-matched to 2,943 cancer-free women who completed FFQs as part of a nationwide study conducted between 2012 and 2016. We used the flavonoid database of common Korean foods and the Phenol-Explorer database to estimate isoflavone intake. The contribution of each food or food group to the total isoflavone intake was calculated. The adjusted least-squares means of dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle and clinical factors were calculated using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Breast cancer survivors had a higher mean dietary isoflavone intake (23.59 mg/day) than cancer-free women (17.81 mg/day). Major food sources, including tofu, soybeans, and doenjang, contributed to over 70% of the isoflavone intake in both groups. When we estimated dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle characteristics, isoflavone intake increased with higher scores of adherence to the American Cancer Society dietary guidelines but decreased with increasing body mass index in both groups. Among cancer-free women, dietary isoflavone intake was higher among those who had never smoked and among dietary supplement users. Among breast cancer survivors, dietary isoflavone intakes did not vary with clinical characteristics, including time since surgery and estrogen receptor status. CONCLUSION Breast cancer survivors were more likely to consume isoflavones than agematched cancer-free women. Dietary isoflavone intake was associated with healthy lifestyle characteristics in women both with and without breast cancer. Further research is needed to understand the role of the higher isoflavone intake among breast cancer survivors compared to cancer-free women on their prognosis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Isoflavones are estrogen-like compounds found in plants and their health effects remain equivocal. We investigated dietary isoflavone intake and its associated factors in Korean breast cancer survivors, with a comparison to cancer-free women. SUBJECTS/METHODS: The usual dietary intake of breast cancer survivors (n = 981, mean age 52 yrs) in 9 hospitals between 2012 and 2019 was assessed using 3-day food records or food frequency questionnaires (FFQs). They were age-matched to 2,943 cancer-free women who completed FFQs as part of a nationwide study conducted between 2012 and 2016. We used the flavonoid database of common Korean foods and the Phenol-Explorer database to estimate isoflavone intake. The contribution of each food or food group to the total isoflavone intake was calculated. The adjusted least-squares means of dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle and clinical factors were calculated using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Breast cancer survivors had a higher mean dietary isoflavone intake (23.59 mg/day) than cancer-free women (17.81 mg/day). Major food sources, including tofu, soybeans, and doenjang, contributed to over 70% of the isoflavone intake in both groups. When we estimated dietary isoflavone intake according to lifestyle characteristics, isoflavone intake increased with higher scores of adherence to the American Cancer Society dietary guidelines but decreased with increasing body mass index in both groups. Among cancer-free women, dietary isoflavone intake was higher among those who had never smoked and among dietary supplement users. Among breast cancer survivors, dietary isoflavone intakes did not vary with clinical characteristics, including time since surgery and estrogen receptor status. CONCLUSION Breast cancer survivors were more likely to consume isoflavones than agematched cancer-free women. Dietary isoflavone intake was associated with healthy lifestyle characteristics in women both with and without breast cancer. Further research is needed to understand the role of the higher isoflavone intake among breast cancer survivors compared to cancer-free women on their prognosis.

Background: We evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific humoral and cellular responses for up to 6 months after the 3rd dose of ancestral coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in people living with HIV (PLWH) and healthy controls (HCs) who were not infected with COVID-19. Methods: Anti-spike receptor-binding domain IgG (anti-RBD IgG) concentrations using chemiluminescence immunoassay and neutralizing antibodies using focus reduction neutralization test (FRNT) were assessed at 1 week after each dose of vaccination, and 3 and 6 months after the 3rd dose in 62 PLWH and 25 HCs. T-cell responses using intracellular cytokine stain were evaluated at 1 week before, and 1 week and 6 months after the 3rd dose. Results: At 1 week after the 3rd dose, adequate anti-RBD IgG (> 300 binding antibody unit /mL) was elicited in all PLWH except for one patient with 36 CD4 T-cell count/mm3 . The geometric mean titers of 50% FRNT against wild type (WT) and omicron BA.5 strains of SARS-CoV-2 in PLWH with CD4 T-cell count ≥ 500 cells/mm3(high CD4 recovery, HCDR) were comparable to HC, but they were significantly decreased in PLWH with CD4 T-cell count < 500/mm3 (low CD4 recovery, LCDR). After adjusting for age, gender, viral suppression, and number of preexisting comorbidities, CD4 T-cell counts < 500/mm3 significantly predicted a poor magnitude of neutralizing antibodies against WT, omicron BA.5, and XBB 1.5 strains among PLWH. Multivariable linear regression adjusting for age and gender revealed that LCDR was associated with reduced neutralizing activity (P = 0.017) and interferon-γ-producing T-cell responses (P = 0.049 for CD T-cell; P = 0.014 for CD8 T-cell) against WT, and strongly associated with more decreased cross-neutralization against omicron BA.5 strains (P < 0.001). Conclusion HCDR demonstrated robust humoral and cell-mediated immune responses after a booster dose of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, whereas LCDR showed diminished immune responses against WT virus and more impaired cross-neutralization against omicron BA.5 strain.

Background: We evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific humoral and cellular responses for up to 6 months after the 3rd dose of ancestral coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in people living with HIV (PLWH) and healthy controls (HCs) who were not infected with COVID-19. Methods: Anti-spike receptor-binding domain IgG (anti-RBD IgG) concentrations using chemiluminescence immunoassay and neutralizing antibodies using focus reduction neutralization test (FRNT) were assessed at 1 week after each dose of vaccination, and 3 and 6 months after the 3rd dose in 62 PLWH and 25 HCs. T-cell responses using intracellular cytokine stain were evaluated at 1 week before, and 1 week and 6 months after the 3rd dose. Results: At 1 week after the 3rd dose, adequate anti-RBD IgG (> 300 binding antibody unit /mL) was elicited in all PLWH except for one patient with 36 CD4 T-cell count/mm3 . The geometric mean titers of 50% FRNT against wild type (WT) and omicron BA.5 strains of SARS-CoV-2 in PLWH with CD4 T-cell count ≥ 500 cells/mm3(high CD4 recovery, HCDR) were comparable to HC, but they were significantly decreased in PLWH with CD4 T-cell count < 500/mm3 (low CD4 recovery, LCDR). After adjusting for age, gender, viral suppression, and number of preexisting comorbidities, CD4 T-cell counts < 500/mm3 significantly predicted a poor magnitude of neutralizing antibodies against WT, omicron BA.5, and XBB 1.5 strains among PLWH. Multivariable linear regression adjusting for age and gender revealed that LCDR was associated with reduced neutralizing activity (P = 0.017) and interferon-γ-producing T-cell responses (P = 0.049 for CD T-cell; P = 0.014 for CD8 T-cell) against WT, and strongly associated with more decreased cross-neutralization against omicron BA.5 strains (P < 0.001). Conclusion HCDR demonstrated robust humoral and cell-mediated immune responses after a booster dose of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, whereas LCDR showed diminished immune responses against WT virus and more impaired cross-neutralization against omicron BA.5 strain.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Vertebral arteriovenous fistula (VAVF) is a rare lesion characterized by an abnormal connection between the extracranial vertebral artery and the surrounding venous plexus. It typically arises due to penetrating injury, although it can occasionally result from blunt trauma. Brachial plexus injury (BPI) is also infrequently associated with VAVF. We present a rare case of VAVF caused by blunt trauma, which resulted in BPI. The patient, who had previously sustained a C2 fracture and C2–3 myelopathy from a bicycle accident, presented with new-onset weakness in the right upper extremity. His previous clinical history led to an initial suspicion of either an exacerbation of a pre-existing lesion or a shoulder injury. However, electromyography indicated that the weakness was due to BPI. Further evaluations later revealed VAVF to be the primary cause of the BPI. VAVF must be recognized as a rare potential reason for BPI, as timely intervention is essential for improving patient recovery and prognosis.

This study aimed to investigate changes in candidemia incidence, species distribution, antifungal susceptibility, initial antifungal use, and mortality trends in Korea before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective analysis was conducted on candidemia cases from two tertiary care hospitals in Korea between 2017 and 2022. Data were compared between the pre-pandemic (2017-2019) and pandemic (2020-2022) periods. Statistical methods included incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and multivariate Cox regression to assess 30-day mortality risk factors. A total of 470 candidemia cases were identified, with 48.7% occurring pre-pandemic and 51.3% during the pandemic. While the overall incidence of candidemia remained similar across the two periods (IRR 1.15;p=0.13), the incidence in intensive care units (ICUs) significantly increased during the pandemic (IRR 1.50; p<0.01). The distribution of Candida species did not differ significantly between the two periods. Fluconazole non-susceptibility in C. albicans markedly decreased (10.0% vs. 0.9%, p<0.01), whereas C. glabrata exhibited a significant rise in caspofungin non-susceptibility during the pandemic (0% vs. 22.4%, p<0.01).Echinocandin use increased (21.8% vs. 34.4%; p<0.01), while fluconazole use declined (48.0% vs. 32.8%; p<0.01). Although the 30-day mortality rate was higher during the pandemic (60.2% vs. 57.2%), the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.57).The findings highlight the need for region-specific surveillance and tailored management strategies to improve candidemia outcomes, especially during healthcare disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.