Purpose: Previous studies from mostly Western populations have suggested possible associations between obesity and melanoma risk. This study aimed to investigate associations between obesity status and melanoma using a nationwide cohort of Koreans. Materials and Methods: A total of 4,441,403 adults who received a national health examination in 2012 were included from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, and followed until December 31, 2022. Obesity status was defined based on the body mass index at the baseline health examination. Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to evaluate associations between obesity status and incident melanoma, with adjustment for confounders. Stratified analyses were performed by sex and menopausal status (in women). Results: Overall, melanoma risk increased according to obesity status (p for trend=0.024); adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for melanoma risk were 0.766 (0.438–1.340) in underweight; 1.292 (1.072–1.557) in overweight; 1.202 (1.002–1.442) in obesity; and 1.191 (0.798–1.778) in severe obesity compared to normal weight (reference). In stratified analyses, similar trends to those of the overall study population were observed among men and premenopausal women (p for trend=0.052 in men and 0.036 in premenopausal women). Among premenopausal women, the risk of melanoma increased linearly with obesity status. Meanwhile, among postmenopausal women, melanoma risk showed no significant difference or trend according to obesity status. Conclusion Overweight and obesity were associated with increased risk of melanoma in a population-based cohort of Koreans. Obese individuals, especially men and premenopausal women, may require more thorough prevention and screening strategies for melanoma.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Background: There is a growing demand for extending dosing intervals of dupilumab injections in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) due to treatment burden and side effects. However, studies on successful dose reduction in real-world settings are lacking. Objective: To assess the efficacy of a patient-centered dupilumab tapering regimen and to propose guidelines for target patients, appropriate intervals, and timing for tapering. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included moderate to severe adult AD patients who underwent at least 16 weeks of dupilumab treatment. Interval prolongation was considered in controlled patients assessed by Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score and serum inflammatory markers after at least 40 weeks of treatment with a standard regimen. Logistic regression model with generalized estimating equations was used to compare repetitive measurements over time between the two groups. Results: A total of 52 patients were included with 11 patients extending intervals to 3–4 weeks without flare-ups. The mean duration of dupilumab treatment before tapering was 53.27 weeks. The tapering group exhibited significantly lower body mass index. All patients of the tapering group showed EASI scores under 4 and immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels under 1,000 IU/mL at week 40. EASI scores and IgE levels remained consistently low after dose reduction, with a mean follow-up time of 14.36 months. Conclusion Patients with extended dosing intervals demonstrated sustained effectiveness. Dose tapering might be a valuable option for non-obese patients with positive clinical response characterized by an EASI score under 4 and IgE levels under 1,000 at week 40.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.