Background: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved empagliflozin for reducing cardiovascular mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with both HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, limited data are available on the generalizability of empagliflozin to clinical practice. Therefore, we evaluated real-world eligibility and potential cost-effectiveness based on a nationwide prospective HF registry. Methods: A total of 3,108 HFrEF and 2,070 HFpEF patients from the Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry were analyzed. Eligibility was estimated by inclusion and exclusion criteria of EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) and EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trials and by FDA & EMA label criteria. The cost-utility analysis was done using a Markov model to project the lifetime medical cost and quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Results: Among the KorAHF patients, 91.4% met FDA & EMA label criteria, while 44.7% met the clinical trial criteria. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of empagliflozin was calculated at US$6,764 per QALY in the overall population, which is far below a threshold of US$18,182 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness benefit was more evident in patients with HFrEF (US$5,012 per QALY) than HFpEF (US$8,971 per QALY). Conclusion There is a large discrepancy in real-world eligibility for empagliflozin between FDA & EMA labels and clinical trial criteria. Empagliflozin is cost-effective in HF patients regardless of ejection fraction in South Korea health care setting. The efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in real-world HF patients should be further investigated for a broader range of clinical applications.

Background: Chronic cough is a common symptom encountered by healthcare practitioners.The global prevalence of chronic cough is 9.6%, with a female predominance. The aim of our study is to reveal the sex differences in prevalence and severity of chronic cough in South Korea, stratified by age and etiology. Methods: This study included adult patients with chronic cough who were recruited from 19 respiratory centers in South Korea. Patients completed the cough numeric rating scale (NRS) and COugh Assessment Test (COAT) questionnaire to assess the severity and multidimensional impact of cough. Results: Among the 625 patients, 419 (67.0%) were females, with a male-to-female ratio of 1:2.03. The mean age was 49.4 years, and the median duration of cough was 12 weeks. The mean NRS and COAT scores were 5.5 ± 1.8 and 9.5 ± 3.6, respectively. Female patients were older (45.3 ± 15.4 vs. 51.6 ± 15.2, P < 0.001) and more likely to have asthma/cough variant asthma (CVA) (26.7% vs. 40.8%, P = 0.001) than male patients. There was no difference in the duration or severity of cough between sexes, regardless of the cause. The male-tofemale ratio was lower for upper airway cough syndrome (UACS), asthma/CVA, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), but not for eosinophilic bronchitis (EB) or unexplained cough. The mean age of female patients was higher in UACS and asthma/CVA, but not in EB, GERD, or unexplained cough. The majority (24.2%) fell within the age category of 50s. The proportion of females with cough increased with age, with a significant rise in the 50s, 60s, and 70–89 age groups. The severity of cough decreased in the 50s, 60s, and 70–89 age groups, with no significant sex differences within the same age group. Conclusion The sex disparities in prevalence and severity of cough varied significantly depending on the age category and etiology. Understanding the specific sex-based difference could enhance comprehension of cough-related pathophysiology and treatment strategies.

This report presents the latest statistics on the stroke population in South Korea, sourced from the Clinical Research Collaborations for Stroke in Korea-National Institute for Health (CRCS-K-NIH), a comprehensive, nationwide, multicenter stroke registry. The Korean cohort, unlike western populations, shows a male-to-female ratio of 1.5, attributed to lower risk factors in Korean women. The average ages for men and women are 67 and 73 years, respectively.Hypertension is the most common risk factor (67%), consistent with global trends, but there is a higher prevalence of diabetes (35%) and smoking (21%). The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (19%) is lower than in western populations, suggesting effective prevention strategies in the general population. A high incidence of large artery atherosclerosis (38%) is observed, likely due to prevalent intracranial arterial disease in East Asians and advanced imaging techniques.There has been a decrease in intravenous thrombolysis rates, from 12% in 2017–2019 to 10% in 2021, with no improvements in door-to-needle and door-to-puncture times, worsened by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. While the use of aspirin plus clopidogrel for noncardioembolic stroke and direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation is well-established, the application of direct oral anticoagulants for non-atrial fibrillation cardioembolic strokes in the acute phase requires further research. The incidence of early neurological deterioration (13%) and the cumulative incidence of recurrent stroke at 3 months (3%) align with global figures. Favorable outcomes at 3 months (63%) are comparable internationally, yet the lack of improvement in dependency at 3 months highlights the need for advancements in acute stroke care.

Background: Achieving a definitive genetic diagnosis of unexplained multiple congenital anomalies (MCAs) in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) infants is challenging because of the limited diagnostic capabilities of conventional genetic tests. Although the implementation of whole genome sequencing (WGS) has commenced for diagnosing MCAs, due to constraints in resources and faculty, many NICUs continue to utilize chromosomal microarray (CMA) and/or karyotyping as the initial diagnostic approach. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of WGS in infants with MCAs who have received negative results from karyotyping and/or CMA. Methods: In this prospective study, we enrolled 80 infants with MCAs who were admitted to a NICU at a single center and had received negative results from CMA and/or karyotyping.The phenotypic characteristics were classified according to the International Classification of Diseases and the Human Phenotype Ontology. We assessed the diagnostic yield of trioWGS in infants with normal chromosomal result and explored the process of diagnosing by analyzing both phenotype and genotype. Also, we compared the phenotype and clinical outcomes between the groups diagnosed with WGS and the undiagnosed group. Results: The diagnostic yield of WGS was 26% (21/80), of which 76% were novel variants.There was a higher diagnostic yield in cases of craniofacial abnormalities, including those of the eye and ear, and a lower diagnostic yield in cases of gastrointestinal and genitourinary abnormalities. In addition, higher rates of rehabilitation therapy and gastrostomy were observed in WGS-diagnosed infants than in undiagnosed infants. Conclusion This prospective cohort study assessed the usefulness of trio-WGS following chromosomal analysis for diagnosing MCAs in the NICU and revealed improvements in the diagnostic yield and clinical utility of WGS.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination administered to adolescent girls through Korea’s National Immunization Program. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients who were 12-13 years old, whether vaccinated or unvaccinated, between July 2016 and December 2017. The incidence of genital warts (GWs) was monitored through 2021. Time-stratified hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated, adjusting for birth year, socioeconomic status, and the level of urbanization of the region, and were presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data were sourced from the Immunization Registry Integration System, linked with the National Health Information Database. RESULTS: The study included 332,062 adolescent girls, with an average follow-up period of approximately 4.6 years. Except for the first year, the HRs for the vaccinated group were lower than those for the unvaccinated group. The HRs for specific cut-off years were as follows: year 2, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.31 to 1.13); year 3, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.96); and year 4 and beyond, 0.39 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52). CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that HPV vaccination was associated with a reduction in the risk of GWs among adolescent girls. Notably, this reduction became significant as the incidence of GWs increased with age.