Connective tissue disease (CTD), comprising a range of autoimmune disorders, is often accompanied by lung involvement, which can lead to life-threatening complications. The primary types of CTDs that manifest as interstitial lung disease (ILD) include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, mixed CTD, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, and systemic lupus erythematosus. CTD-ILD presents a significant challenge in clinical diagnosis and management due to its heterogeneous nature and variable prognosis. Early diagnosis through clinical, serological, and radiographic assessments is crucial for distinguishing CTD-ILD from idiopathic forms and for implementing appropriate therapeutic strategies. Hence, we have reviewed the multiple clinical manifestations and diagnostic approaches for each type of CTD-ILD, acknowledging the diversity and complexity of the disease. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing the management of CTD-ILD is emphasized by recent therapeutic advancements, which include immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic therapies, and newer biological agents targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis. Therapeutic strategies should be customized according to the type of CTD, the extent of lung involvement, and the presence of extrapulmonary manifestations. Additionally, we aimed to provide clinical guidance, including therapeutic recommendations, for the effective management of CTD-ILD, based on patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) analysis.

Connective tissue disease (CTD), comprising a range of autoimmune disorders, is often accompanied by lung involvement, which can lead to life-threatening complications. The primary types of CTDs that manifest as interstitial lung disease (ILD) include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, mixed CTD, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, and systemic lupus erythematosus. CTD-ILD presents a significant challenge in clinical diagnosis and management due to its heterogeneous nature and variable prognosis. Early diagnosis through clinical, serological, and radiographic assessments is crucial for distinguishing CTD-ILD from idiopathic forms and for implementing appropriate therapeutic strategies. Hence, we have reviewed the multiple clinical manifestations and diagnostic approaches for each type of CTD-ILD, acknowledging the diversity and complexity of the disease. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing the management of CTD-ILD is emphasized by recent therapeutic advancements, which include immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic therapies, and newer biological agents targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis. Therapeutic strategies should be customized according to the type of CTD, the extent of lung involvement, and the presence of extrapulmonary manifestations. Additionally, we aimed to provide clinical guidance, including therapeutic recommendations, for the effective management of CTD-ILD, based on patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) analysis.

Connective tissue disease (CTD), comprising a range of autoimmune disorders, is often accompanied by lung involvement, which can lead to life-threatening complications. The primary types of CTDs that manifest as interstitial lung disease (ILD) include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, mixed CTD, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, and systemic lupus erythematosus. CTD-ILD presents a significant challenge in clinical diagnosis and management due to its heterogeneous nature and variable prognosis. Early diagnosis through clinical, serological, and radiographic assessments is crucial for distinguishing CTD-ILD from idiopathic forms and for implementing appropriate therapeutic strategies. Hence, we have reviewed the multiple clinical manifestations and diagnostic approaches for each type of CTD-ILD, acknowledging the diversity and complexity of the disease. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing the management of CTD-ILD is emphasized by recent therapeutic advancements, which include immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic therapies, and newer biological agents targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis. Therapeutic strategies should be customized according to the type of CTD, the extent of lung involvement, and the presence of extrapulmonary manifestations. Additionally, we aimed to provide clinical guidance, including therapeutic recommendations, for the effective management of CTD-ILD, based on patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) analysis.

Connective tissue disease (CTD), comprising a range of autoimmune disorders, is often accompanied by lung involvement, which can lead to life-threatening complications. The primary types of CTDs that manifest as interstitial lung disease (ILD) include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, mixed CTD, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, and systemic lupus erythematosus. CTD-ILD presents a significant challenge in clinical diagnosis and management due to its heterogeneous nature and variable prognosis. Early diagnosis through clinical, serological, and radiographic assessments is crucial for distinguishing CTD-ILD from idiopathic forms and for implementing appropriate therapeutic strategies. Hence, we have reviewed the multiple clinical manifestations and diagnostic approaches for each type of CTD-ILD, acknowledging the diversity and complexity of the disease. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing the management of CTD-ILD is emphasized by recent therapeutic advancements, which include immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic therapies, and newer biological agents targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis. Therapeutic strategies should be customized according to the type of CTD, the extent of lung involvement, and the presence of extrapulmonary manifestations. Additionally, we aimed to provide clinical guidance, including therapeutic recommendations, for the effective management of CTD-ILD, based on patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) analysis.

Connective tissue disease (CTD), comprising a range of autoimmune disorders, is often accompanied by lung involvement, which can lead to life-threatening complications. The primary types of CTDs that manifest as interstitial lung disease (ILD) include rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, mixed CTD, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, and systemic lupus erythematosus. CTD-ILD presents a significant challenge in clinical diagnosis and management due to its heterogeneous nature and variable prognosis. Early diagnosis through clinical, serological, and radiographic assessments is crucial for distinguishing CTD-ILD from idiopathic forms and for implementing appropriate therapeutic strategies. Hence, we have reviewed the multiple clinical manifestations and diagnostic approaches for each type of CTD-ILD, acknowledging the diversity and complexity of the disease. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach in optimizing the management of CTD-ILD is emphasized by recent therapeutic advancements, which include immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic therapies, and newer biological agents targeting specific pathways involved in the pathogenesis. Therapeutic strategies should be customized according to the type of CTD, the extent of lung involvement, and the presence of extrapulmonary manifestations. Additionally, we aimed to provide clinical guidance, including therapeutic recommendations, for the effective management of CTD-ILD, based on patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) analysis.

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: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors are frequently prescribed for patients with type 2 diabetes; however, their cost can pose a significant barrier for those with impaired kidney function. This study aimed to estimate the economic benefits of substituting non-renal dose-adjusted (NRDA) DPP4 inhibitors with renal dose-adjusted (RDA) DPP4 inhibitors in patients with both impaired kidney function and type 2 diabetes. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018, using data obtained from common data models of five medical centers in Korea. Model 1 applied the prescription pattern of participants with preserved kidney function to those with impaired kidney function. In contrast, model 2 replaced all NRDA DPP4 inhibitors with RDA DPP4 inhibitors, adjusting the doses of RDA DPP4 inhibitors based on individual kidney function. The primary outcome was the cost difference between the two models. Results: In total, 67,964,996 prescription records were analyzed. NRDA DPP4 inhibitors were more frequently prescribed to patients with impaired kidney function than in those with preserved kidney function (25.7%, 51.3%, 64.3%, and 71.6% in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates [eGFRs] of ≥60, <60, <45, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively). When model 1 was applied, the cost savings per year were 7.6% for eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 30.4% for eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. According to model 2, 15.4% to 51.2% per year could be saved depending on kidney impairment severity. Conclusion Adjusting the doses of RDA DPP4 inhibitors based on individual kidney function could alleviate the economic burden associated with medical expenses.