Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of romosozumab, a bone anabolic agent, versus vertebroplasty, a conventional surgical intervention, in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Methods: A retrospective analysis included 86 thoracic/lumbar compression fracture patients from 2014 to 2022 at a medical center. Forty-two patients received romosozumab (monthly injections for 1 year) followed by 1 year of denosumab, while 44 underwent vertebroplasty followed by denosumab injections biannually for 2 years. Outcomes were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain, bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral compression ratio, and Cobb angle over 12 months. Results: At 12 months, the romosozumab group showed a greater reduction in NRS scores (4.90 ± 1.01 vs. 4.27 ± 1.34, p = 0.015) and a higher increase in lumbar BMD (0.8 ± 0.5 vs. 0.5 ± 0.3, p = 0.000) compared to the vertebroplasty group. There were no significant differences in changes in hip total BMD and femur neck BMD (p = 0.190, p = 0.167, respectively). Radiographic assessments showed no significant differences in vertebral compression ratio (14.7% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.960) or Cobb angle (4.2° vs. 4.9°; p = 0.302). The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures was lower in the romosozumab group (7.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.051), with similar rates of cardiovascular events in both groups (4.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.716). Conclusion Romosozumab has demonstrated superior pain reduction and lumbar BMD improvement compared to vertebroplasty at 12 months, with no significant differences in radiographic outcomes or adverse events, suggesting it as an alternative to vertebroplasty for OVCF.

Background: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare hematologic disorder characterized by uncontrolled terminal complement activation. Eculizumab, a monoclonal antibody C5 inhibitor was introduced in Korea in 2009 and has been the standard treatment option for PNH. Methods: This study assessed the long-term efficacy/safety of eculizumab in PNH using real-world data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. Eighty patients who initiated eculizumab from 2009–2020 were enrolled. Results: At eculizumab initiation, the median age was 51.5 years, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) 6.8 × upper limit of normal, and granulocyte clone size 93.0%. All patients had at least one PNH-related complication before eculizumab initiation, including renal failure (n = 36), smooth muscle spasm (n = 24), thromboembolism (n = 20), and pulmonary hypertension (n = 15). The median (range) duration of eculizumab treatment was 52.7 (1.0, 127.3) months (338.6 total treated patient-years). Despite high disease activity in the study population before treatment initiation, overall survival was 96.2% and LDH levels were stabilized in most patients during treatment. PNH-related complications at treatment initiation were resolved in 44.4% of patients with renal failure, 95.8% with smooth muscle spasm, 70.0% with thromboembolism, and 26.7% with pulmonary hypertension. Extravascular hemolysis occurred in 28.8% of patients (n = 23; 0.09 per patient-year) and breakthrough hemolysis in 18.8% (n = 15; 0.06 per patient-year). No treatment discontinuation cases related to eculizumab were observed. Conclusion These data provided evidence for the long-term efficacy and safety of eculizumab in Korean PNH patients with high disease burdens.

Purpose: High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard management for relapsed or high-risk non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). We reported the busulfan, melphalan, and etoposide (BuME) conditioning regimen was effective in patients with relapsed or high-risk NHL. Moreover, the busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (BuCE) conditioning regimen has been used widely in ASCT for NHL. Therefore, based on these encouraging results, this randomized phase II multicenter trial compared the outcomes of BuME and BuCE as conditioning therapies for ASCT in patients with NHL. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either BuME (n=36) or BuCE (n=39). The BuME regimen was comprised of busulfan (3.2 mg/kg/day, intravenously) administered on days –7, –6, and –5, etoposide (400 mg/m2 intravenously) on days –5 and –4, and melphalan (50 mg/m2/day intravenously) on days –3 and –2. The BuCE regimen was comprised of busulfan (3.2 mg/kg/day intravenously) on days –7, –6, and –5, etoposide (400 mg/m2/day intravenously) on days –5 and –4, and cyclophosphamide (50 mg/kg/day intravenously) on days –3 and –2. The primary endpoint was 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Seventy-five patients were enrolled. Eleven patients (30.5%) in the BuME group and 13 patients (33.3%) in the BuCE group had disease progression or died. The 2-year PFS rate was 65.4% in the BuME group and 60.6% in the BuCE group (p=0.746). There were no non-relapse mortalities within 100 days after transplantation. Conclusion There were no significant differences in PFS between the two groups. Therefore, busulfan-based conditioning regimens, BuME and BuCE, may be important treatment substitutes for the BCNU-containing regimens.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the characteristics and prognostic factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the emergency departments (EDs) in Daegu, Korea, the region with the second regional outbreak worldwide. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational multicenter study using a population-based COVID-19 registry of EDs. We included the demographic, clinical and laboratory data. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to identify the prognostic factors of mortality. Results: A total of 241 patients were included in this study. In the Cox hazard regression model (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]), age (65-79 years: 3.531 [1.529-8.156], ≥80 years: 5.335 [2.229-12.770]), respiratory rate (RR) (>20 breaths/min: 2.025 [1.205-3.403], ≤11 breaths/min: 111.292 [30.845-401.555]), lymphocyte counts <1.0×109/L (2.611 [1.494-4.739]), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels>23 mg/dL (2.047 [1.233-3.399]), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels>40 IU/L (1.785 [1.009-3.158]) and neutrophil counts>6.3×109/L (1.638 [1.014-2.644]) were associated with mortality. Conclusion Age, RR, lymphocyte counts, BUN levels, AST levels and neutrophil counts were prognostic factors in COVID-19 patients in the ED. These factors can help effectively treat and reduce mortality through optimized management of COVID-19 patients, in places with limited emergency medical resources such as massive regional outbreaks.

Objective: The characteristics and prognosis of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients can vary due to a variety of factors, including the time of the day. We tried to identify the characteristics and prognosis of OHCA in a Korean metro city based on the time of the day. Methods: This citywide retrospective observational study was conducted from January 1, 2015, to November 31, 2020, in Daegu, Korea on patients over 18 years of age who were suspected of having a medical etiology of OHCA. We evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of OHCA, according to the time of day, divided into dawn (00:00-05:59), morning (06:00-11:59), afternoon (12:00-17:59), and night (18:00-23:59). The outcome variables were survival to hospital discharge and favorable neurological outcomes. Results: The median age of the total of 4,783 OHCA patients in the study was 72.0 years of which 3,096 (64.7%) were males. The number of patients who survived was 317 (7.8%) and 301 (6.3%) were discharged with favorable neurological outcomes. There were 672 (14.0%) patients admitted at dawn, 1,607 (33.6%) in the morning, 1,379 (28.8%) in the afternoon, and 1,125 (23.5%) at night. After adjusting for the possible confounding variables, compared with the morning group, the survival to hospital discharge was low in the afternoon and the night (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-0.98 and aOR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). In addition, favorable neurological outcomes were also low in the afternoon and the night compared with the morning (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40-0.85 and aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.93). Conclusion Diurnal differences in OHCA outcomes were observed. Identification of the diurnal OHCA characteristics will be necessary to devise an appropriate regional emergency medical services strategy.

Background/Aims: We evaluated the feasibility and long-term efficacy of the combination of cytarabine, idarubicin, and all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) for treating patients with newly diagnosed acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). Methods: We included 87 patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia and a t(15;17) or promyelocytic leukemia/retinoic acid receptor alpha (PML-RARα) mutation. Patients received 12 mg/m2/day idarubicin intravenously for 3 days and 100 mg/m2/day cytarabine for 7 days, plus 45 mg/m2/day ATRA. Clinical outcomes included complete remission (CR), relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and the secondary malignancy incidence during a 20-year follow-up. Results: The CR, 10-year RFS, and 10-year OS rates were 89.7%, 94.1%, and 73.8%, respectively, for all patients. The 10-year OS rate was 100% for patients that achieved CR. Subjects were classified according to the white blood cell (WBC) count in peripheral blood at diagnosis (low-risk, WBC < 10,000/mm3; high-risk, WBC ≥ 10,000/mm3). The low-risk group had significantly higher RFS and OS rates than the high-risk group, but the outcomes were not superior to the current standard treatment (arsenic trioxide plus ATRA). Toxicities were similar to those observed with anthracycline plus ATRA, and higher than those observed with arsenic trioxide plus ATRA. The secondary malignancy incidence after APL treatment was 2.7%, among the 75 patients that achieved CR, and 5.0% among the 40 patients that survived more than 5 years after the APL diagnosis. Conclusions Adding cytarabine to anthracycline plus ATRA was not inferior to anthracycline plus ATRA alone, but it was not comparable to arsenic trioxide plus ATRA. The probability of secondary malignancy was low.