Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Naegleria fowleri, a brain-eating amoeba, thrives in lakes and rivers with aquatic vegetation and causes primary amoebic meningoencephalitis (PAM) in humans. Most recently, it has become such a serious problem that N. fowleri was detected in tap water in Houston, USA. Several pathogenic factors are considered very important to destroy target cells in the brain. In particular, the food-cup where N. fowleri antigen-1 (Nfa1) is located, is strongly expressed in pseudopodia involved in the movement of N. fowleri, and is involved in phagocytosis by attaching to target cells. In this article, we reviewed the role of the Nfa1 protein and its associated pathogenicity. The nfa1 gene was cloned by cDNA library immunoscreening using infection serum and immune serum. Nfa1 protein is mainly distributed in pseudopodia important to movement and vacuoles. Moreover, heat shock protein 70, cathepsin-like proteare and Nf-actin are also associated with pseudopodia in which Nfa1 is localized. Interestingly, the amount of the nfa1 gene changed as N. fowleri trophozoites transformed into cysts. Polyclonal antiserum against Nfa1 showed a protective effect against cytotoxicity of approximately 19.7%. Nfa1-specific IgA antibodies prevent N. fowleri trophozoites from adhering to the nasal mucosa, delaying invasion. The nfa1-vaccinated mice showed significantly higher levels of Nfa1-specific antibody. The duration of anti-Nfa1 IgG in the vaccinated mice lasted 12 weeks, strongly suggesting that nfa1 is a significant pathogenic gene and that Nfa1 is a pathogenic protein. Several factors related to pseudopodia and locomotion have been linked to Nfa1. A clearer function of N. fowleri targeting nfa1 with other genes might enable target-based inhibition of N. fowleri pathogenicity.

Complement C5a receptor (C5aR) signaling in immune cells has various functions, inducing inflammatory or anti-inflammatory responses based on the type of ligand present. The Co1 peptide (SFHQLPARSRPLP) has been reported to activate C5aR signaling in dendritic cells. We investigated the effect of C5aR signaling via the Co1 peptide on macrophages. In peritoneal macrophages, the interaction between C5aR and the Co1 peptide activated the mTOR pathway, resulting in the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Considering the close associations of mTOR signaling with IL-6 and TNF-α in macrophage training, our findings indicate that the Co1 peptide amplifies β-glucan-induced trained immunity. Overall, this research highlights a previously underappreciated aspect of C5aR signaling in trained immunity, and posits that the Co1 peptide is a potentially effective immunomodulator for enhancing trained immunity.

Complement C5a receptor (C5aR) signaling in immune cells has various functions, inducing inflammatory or anti-inflammatory responses based on the type of ligand present. The Co1 peptide (SFHQLPARSRPLP) has been reported to activate C5aR signaling in dendritic cells. We investigated the effect of C5aR signaling via the Co1 peptide on macrophages. In peritoneal macrophages, the interaction between C5aR and the Co1 peptide activated the mTOR pathway, resulting in the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Considering the close associations of mTOR signaling with IL-6 and TNF-α in macrophage training, our findings indicate that the Co1 peptide amplifies β-glucan-induced trained immunity. Overall, this research highlights a previously underappreciated aspect of C5aR signaling in trained immunity, and posits that the Co1 peptide is a potentially effective immunomodulator for enhancing trained immunity.

Naegleria fowleri, a brain-eating amoeba, thrives in lakes and rivers with aquatic vegetation and causes primary amoebic meningoencephalitis (PAM) in humans. Most recently, it has become such a serious problem that N. fowleri was detected in tap water in Houston, USA. Several pathogenic factors are considered very important to destroy target cells in the brain. In particular, the food-cup where N. fowleri antigen-1 (Nfa1) is located, is strongly expressed in pseudopodia involved in the movement of N. fowleri, and is involved in phagocytosis by attaching to target cells. In this article, we reviewed the role of the Nfa1 protein and its associated pathogenicity. The nfa1 gene was cloned by cDNA library immunoscreening using infection serum and immune serum. Nfa1 protein is mainly distributed in pseudopodia important to movement and vacuoles. Moreover, heat shock protein 70, cathepsin-like proteare and Nf-actin are also associated with pseudopodia in which Nfa1 is localized. Interestingly, the amount of the nfa1 gene changed as N. fowleri trophozoites transformed into cysts. Polyclonal antiserum against Nfa1 showed a protective effect against cytotoxicity of approximately 19.7%. Nfa1-specific IgA antibodies prevent N. fowleri trophozoites from adhering to the nasal mucosa, delaying invasion. The nfa1-vaccinated mice showed significantly higher levels of Nfa1-specific antibody. The duration of anti-Nfa1 IgG in the vaccinated mice lasted 12 weeks, strongly suggesting that nfa1 is a significant pathogenic gene and that Nfa1 is a pathogenic protein. Several factors related to pseudopodia and locomotion have been linked to Nfa1. A clearer function of N. fowleri targeting nfa1 with other genes might enable target-based inhibition of N. fowleri pathogenicity.

Background: s/Aims: Reported incidence of extrahepatic bile duct cancer is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Korea, in particular, is one of the countries with the highest incidence rates of extrahepatic bile duct cancer in the world. Although research and innovative therapeutic modalities for extrahepatic bile duct cancer are emerging, clinical guidelines are currently unavailable in Korea. The Korean Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery in collaboration with related societies (Korean Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery Society, Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Korean Society of Radiation Oncology, Korean Society of Pathologists, and Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine) decided to establish clinical guideline for extrahepatic bile duct cancer in June 2021. Methods: Contents of the guidelines were developed through subgroup meetings for each key question and a preliminary draft was finalized through a Clinical Guidelines Committee workshop. Results: In November 2021, the finalized draft was presented for public scrutiny during a formal hearing. Conclusions The extrahepatic guideline committee believed that this guideline could be helpful in the treatment of patients.