Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

Background: Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries followed-up for a minimum of 5 years and investigate how arthroscopic partial excision for radial head fractures affects the results at the final follow-up. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with terrible triad injuries who underwent all-arthroscopic treatment between January 2011 and June 2018. In group I, we performed conservative or arthroscopic fixation of stable radial head fractures, while in group II, arthroscopic partial excision of unstable radial head fractures involving <30%–50% of the articular surface area was performed. Clinical outcomes were measured by visual analog scale score and assessment of instability, range of motion (ROM), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using x-rays, and the integrity of the repaired lateral collateral ligament complex was confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Thirty-two patients with an average age of 49.5±16.2 years met the inclusion criteria and were followed-up for a mean of 82.7±22.2 months. Twenty patients were assigned to group I and 12 patients to group II. Clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05). On radiological evaluation, more heterotopic ossifications were found in the radial head excision group (group II, 66.7% vs. group I, 35%; P=0.02); however, there was no significant difference in ROM between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions In all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries, arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head did not seem to have a significant impact on elbow joint stability.Level of evidence: III.

Background: Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries followed-up for a minimum of 5 years and investigate how arthroscopic partial excision for radial head fractures affects the results at the final follow-up. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with terrible triad injuries who underwent all-arthroscopic treatment between January 2011 and June 2018. In group I, we performed conservative or arthroscopic fixation of stable radial head fractures, while in group II, arthroscopic partial excision of unstable radial head fractures involving <30%–50% of the articular surface area was performed. Clinical outcomes were measured by visual analog scale score and assessment of instability, range of motion (ROM), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using x-rays, and the integrity of the repaired lateral collateral ligament complex was confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Thirty-two patients with an average age of 49.5±16.2 years met the inclusion criteria and were followed-up for a mean of 82.7±22.2 months. Twenty patients were assigned to group I and 12 patients to group II. Clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05). On radiological evaluation, more heterotopic ossifications were found in the radial head excision group (group II, 66.7% vs. group I, 35%; P=0.02); however, there was no significant difference in ROM between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions In all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries, arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head did not seem to have a significant impact on elbow joint stability.Level of evidence: III.

Background: Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries followed-up for a minimum of 5 years and investigate how arthroscopic partial excision for radial head fractures affects the results at the final follow-up. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with terrible triad injuries who underwent all-arthroscopic treatment between January 2011 and June 2018. In group I, we performed conservative or arthroscopic fixation of stable radial head fractures, while in group II, arthroscopic partial excision of unstable radial head fractures involving <30%–50% of the articular surface area was performed. Clinical outcomes were measured by visual analog scale score and assessment of instability, range of motion (ROM), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using x-rays, and the integrity of the repaired lateral collateral ligament complex was confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Thirty-two patients with an average age of 49.5±16.2 years met the inclusion criteria and were followed-up for a mean of 82.7±22.2 months. Twenty patients were assigned to group I and 12 patients to group II. Clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05). On radiological evaluation, more heterotopic ossifications were found in the radial head excision group (group II, 66.7% vs. group I, 35%; P=0.02); however, there was no significant difference in ROM between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions In all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries, arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head did not seem to have a significant impact on elbow joint stability.Level of evidence: III.

Background: Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries followed-up for a minimum of 5 years and investigate how arthroscopic partial excision for radial head fractures affects the results at the final follow-up. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with terrible triad injuries who underwent all-arthroscopic treatment between January 2011 and June 2018. In group I, we performed conservative or arthroscopic fixation of stable radial head fractures, while in group II, arthroscopic partial excision of unstable radial head fractures involving <30%–50% of the articular surface area was performed. Clinical outcomes were measured by visual analog scale score and assessment of instability, range of motion (ROM), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using x-rays, and the integrity of the repaired lateral collateral ligament complex was confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging. Results: Thirty-two patients with an average age of 49.5±16.2 years met the inclusion criteria and were followed-up for a mean of 82.7±22.2 months. Twenty patients were assigned to group I and 12 patients to group II. Clinical outcomes showed no significant differences between the two groups at the final follow-up (P>0.05). On radiological evaluation, more heterotopic ossifications were found in the radial head excision group (group II, 66.7% vs. group I, 35%; P=0.02); however, there was no significant difference in ROM between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions In all-arthroscopic treatment of terrible triad injuries, arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head did not seem to have a significant impact on elbow joint stability.Level of evidence: III.

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.

This study aimed to analyze the experiences of new nurses during their first year of hospital employment to gather data for the development of an evidence-based new nurse residency program focused on adaptability. Methods: This study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Korea between March and August 2021 with 80 new nurses who wrote in critical reflective journals during their first year of work. NetMiner 4.5.0 was used to conduct a text network analysis of the critical reflective journals to uncover core keywords and topics across three periods. Results: In the journals, over time, degree centrality emerged as “study” and “patient understanding” for 1 to 3 months, “insufficient” and “stress” for 4 to 6 months, and “handover” and “preparation” for 7 to 12 months. Major sub-themes at 1 to 3 months were: “rounds,” “intravenous-cannulation,” “medical device,” and “patient understanding”; at 4 to 6 months they were “admission,” “discharge,” “oxygen therapy,” and “disease”; and at 7 to 12 months they were “burden,” “independence,” and “solution.” Conclusion:These results provide valuable insights into the challenges and experiences encountered by new nurses during different stages of their field adaptation process. This information may highlight the best nurse leadership methods for improving institutional education and supporting new nurses’ transitions to the hospital work environment.

An avulsion fracture occurs when a muscle-tendon unit attached to a bone produces sufficient force to tear a fragment of the bone. If not treated properly, this injury can lead to deformity, nonunion, malunion, pain, and disability. Although avulsion fractures around the foot and ankle can occur anywhere there are tendon and ligament attachments, they are common in the anterior talofibular ligament, anterior-inferior tibiotalar ligament, calcaneal tuberosity, the base of the fifth metatarsal, and navicular bone. The optimal treatment for each fracture depends on the location and severity of the fracture.Conservative treatment involves limiting weight bearing for a period, splint immobilization, and using various orthoses. Surgical treatment is usually reserved for cases of severe displacement or when nonsurgical treatment has failed. The goals of surgery include reduction of the fracture fragment, prevention of nonunion or malunion and soft tissue injury, and early return to function. The decision for each treatment modality may depend on the patient demographics or preferences and the surgeon experience. This review summarizes previous and current views on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of common avulsion fractures to guide the treatment and diagnosis.