1.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
2.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
3.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
4.Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults
Jung-Joon CHA ; Soon Jun HONG ; Subin LIM ; Ju Hyeon KIM ; Hyung Joon JOO ; Jae Hyoung PARK ; Cheol Woong YU ; Do-Sun LIM ; Jang Young KIM ; Jin-Ok JEONG ; Jeong-Hun SHIN ; Chi Young SHIM ; Jong-Young LEE ; Young-Hyo LIM ; Sung Ha PARK ; Eun Joo CHO ; Hasung KIM ; Jungkuk LEE ; Ki-Chul SUNG ;
Korean Circulation Journal 2024;54(9):534-544
Background and Objectives:
Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy.
Methods:
Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years.
Results:
The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups.
Conclusions
Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.
5.Feasibility and Efficacy of the Indoor Cognitive Training Combined Physical Activity Program Using Wearable Sensor and Mobile Device in Subjects With Mild Cognitive Impairment
Hak Hyeon KIM ; Grace Eun KIM ; Woori MOON ; Ji Hyun HAN ; Jeonga SHIN ; Seung Wan SUH ; Jeong Hun SHIN ; Won Kyo JEONG ; Ki Woong KIM ; Ji Won HAN
Journal of Korean Geriatric Psychiatry 2024;28(1):7-15
Objective:
We developed the Indoor Cognitive Training combined with Physical Activity (ICT-PA) program, incorporating memory registration, navigation, and image recall through wearable sensors and Bluetooth Low Energy tags, aimed at enhancing cognitive function and physical activity in elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
Methods:
Thirty-six elderly individuals over 60 years diagnosed with MCI participated in a 6-week ICT-PA program. The primary outcome measure was the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Total Score 1 (CERAD-TS1), and the secondary outcome measures were the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Subjective Memory Complaints Questionnaire (SMCQ), and Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-KR). Changes in scores before and after the program were analyzed using paired t-tests. Program satisfaction was evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale.
Results:
CERAD-TS1 scores significantly improved after ICT-PA training (pre 57.3±11.3; post 60.3±13.1; p=0.006), while MMSE, SMCQ and GDS-KR scores remained unchanged. Subgroup analysis showed significant CERAD-TS improvements in the compliance group (>360 minutes of ICT-PA use) (pre 58.5±11.7; post 62.7±12.9; p=0.002). The average program satisfaction score was 7.7±1.6 out of 10. Data are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Conclusion
The ICT-PA program effectively improved cognitive functions in MCI patients, with high satisfaction rates.
6.Exploring the Effects of 630 nm Wavelength of Light-Emitting Diode Irradiation on the Proliferation and Migration Ability of Human Biceps Tendon Fibroblast Cells
Ji Hyeon RYU ; Jisu PARK ; Ji Won KIM ; Yong-Il SHIN ; Sang Don LEE ; Youngkwang OH ; Suk-Woong KANG
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2023;15(1):166-174
Background:
Light-emitting diode (LED)-based photobiomodulation is used as an inducer of cell regeneration. Although numerous in vitro and in vivo orthopedic studies have been conducted, the ideal LED wavelength range for tendon healing has not yet been determined. This study, thus, focused on the effects of LED of a 630 nm wavelength on the cell viability, proliferation, and migration of human biceps tendon fibroblast cells.
Methods:
Human tendon fibroblast cell culture was performed using the biceps tendon of patients who had undergone biceps tenodesis. Human biceps tendon fibroblasts from two patients (male, aged 42 and 69 years) were isolated and cultured. The cell type was confirmed by a morphological analysis and using tendon and fibroblast specific markers. They were then split into three groups, with each receiving a different irradiation treatment: no LED treatment (control), 630 nm LED, and 630 nm + 880 nm LED for 20 minutes each. After the LED treatment, cell viability, proliferation, and migration assays were performed, and the results were compared between the groups.
Results:
Twenty-four hours after LED treatment, cell viability and proliferation were significantly increased in the 630 nm LED and 630 nm + 880 nm LED treatment groups compared to that in the control group (p < 0.05). Under the same conditions, compared with the control group, the 630 nm LED alone treatment group showed a 3.06 ± 0.21 times higher cell migration rate (p < 0.05), and the 630 nm + 880 nm LED combination treatment group showed a 2.88 ± 0.20 times higher cell migration rate (p < 0.05) in threedimensional migration assay.
Conclusions
In human tendon fibroblast cells, 20 minutes of LED treatment at 630 nm and 630 nm + 880 nm exhibited significant effects on cell proliferation and migration. Our findings suggest the potential of LED therapy as an adjuvant treatment for tendon healing, and hence, further research is warranted to standardize the various parameters to further develop and establish this as a reliable treatment regimen.
7.Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(1):3-106
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.
8.Current Treatment Patterns and the Role of Upfront Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma: A Korean Nationwide, Multicenter Prospective Registry Study (CISL 1404)
Hyungwoo CHO ; Dok Hyun YOON ; Dong-Yeop SHIN ; Youngil KOH ; Sung-Soo YOON ; Seok Jin KIM ; Young Rok DO ; Gyeong-Won LEE ; Jae-Yong KWAK ; Yong PARK ; Min Kyoung KIM ; Hye Jin KANG ; Jun Ho YI ; Kwai Han YOO ; Won Sik LEE ; Byeong Bae PARK ; Jae Cheol JO ; Hyeon-Seok EOM ; Hyo Jung KIM ; Seong Hyun JEONG ; Young-Woong WON ; Byeong Seok SOHN ; Ji-Hyun KWON ; Cheolwon SUH ; Won Seog KIM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2023;55(2):684-692
Purpose:
We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, prospective registry study for newly diagnosed patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) to better define the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, survival outcomes, and the role of upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in these patients.
Materials and Methods:
Patients with PTCL receiving chemotherapy with curative intent were registered and prospectively monitored. All patients were pathologically diagnosed with PTCL.
Results:
A total of 191 patients with PTCL were enrolled in this prospective registry study. PTCL, not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS) was the most common pathologic subtype (n=80, 41.9%), followed by angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) (n=60, 31.4%). With a median follow-up duration of 3.9 years, the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 39.5% and 60.4%, respectively. The role of upfront ASCT was evaluated in patients who were considered transplant-eligible (n=59). ASCT was performed as an upfront consolidative treatment in 32 (54.2%) of these patients. There were no significant differences in PFS and OS between the ASCT and non-ASCT groups for all patients (n=59) and for patients with PTCL-NOS (n=26). However, in patients with AITL, the ASCT group was associated with significantly better PFS than the non-ASCT group, although there was no significant difference in OS.
Conclusion
The current study demonstrated that the survival outcomes with the current treatment options remain poor for patients with PTCL-NOS. Upfront ASCT may provide a survival benefit for patients with AITL, but not PTCL-NOS.
9.Short-Term Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness between Long-Course Chemoradiation and Short-Course Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Min Soo CHO ; Hyeon Woo BAE ; Jee Suk CHANG ; Seung Yoon YANG ; Tae Hyun KIM ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Sang Joon SHIN ; Gyu-Seog CHOI ; Nam Kyu KIM
Yonsei Medical Journal 2023;64(6):395-403
Purpose:
Long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) has been widely recommended in a majority of rectal cancer patients. Recently, encouraging data on short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) for rectal cancer has emerged. In this study, we aimed to compare these two methods in terms of short-term outcomes and cost analysis under the Korean medical insurance system.
Materials and Methods:
Sixty-two patients with high-risk rectal cancer, who underwent either SCRT or LCRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME), were classified into two groups. Twenty-seven patients received 5 Gy×5 with two cycles of XELOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m 2 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks) followed by TME (SCRT group). Thirty-five patients received capecitabine-based LCRT followed by TME (LCRT group). Short-term outcomes and cost estimation were assessed between the two groups.
Results:
Pathological complete response was achieved in 18.5% and 5.7% of patients in the SCRT and LCRT groups, respectively (p=0.223). The 2-year recurrence-free survival rate did not show significant difference between the two groups (SCRT vs. LCRT:91.9% vs. 76.2%, p=0.394). The average total cost per patient for SCRT was 18% lower for inpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $18787 vs. $22203, p<0.001) and 40% lower for outpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $11955 vs. $19641, p<0.001) compared to LCRT. SCRT was shown to be the dominant treatment option with fewer recurrences and fewer complications at a lower cost.
Conclusion
SCRT was well-tolerated and achieved favorable short-term outcomes. In addition, SCRT showed significant reduction in the total cost of care and distinguished cost-effectiveness compared to LCRT.
10.Erratum: Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidencebased, Multidisciplinary Approach
Tae-Han KIM ; In-Ho KIM ; Seung Joo KANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Baek-Hui KIM ; Bang Wool EOM ; Bum Jun KIM ; Byung-Hoon MIN ; Chang In CHOI ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Chung Hyun TAE ; Chung sik GONG ; Dong Jin KIM ; Arthur Eung-Hyuck CHO ; Eun Jeong GONG ; Geum Jong SONG ; Hyeon-Su IM ; Hye Seong AHN ; Hyun LIM ; Hyung-Don KIM ; Jae-Joon KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Jeong Won LEE ; Ji Yeon PARK ; Jwa Hoon KIM ; Kyoung Doo SONG ; Minkyu JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Sang-Yong SON ; Shin-Hoo PARK ; Soo Jin KIM ; Sung Hak LEE ; Tae-Yong KIM ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Woong Sub KOOM ; Yeseob JEE ; Yoo Min KIM ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Young Suk PARK ; Hye Sook HAN ; Su Youn NAM ; Seong-Ho KONG
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2023;23(2):365-373

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail