Purpose: We aimed to investigate how genetic predisposition to drinking and gastric cancer (GC) modifies the association between alcohol consumption and GC risk in the Korean population. Materials and Methods: Polygenic risk scores for GC (PRS-GC) and alcohol consumption (PRS-Alcohol) were formulated using genome-wide association results from BioBank Japan. Validation was performed using Korean cohorts (SNUBH-GENIE cohort), incorporating 8,846 controls and 531 patients with GC. Subsequently, these PRSs were applied to an independent Korean cohort of 67,771 participants, including 313 patients with GC during the follow-up for 14 years (KoGES cohort). Results: In KoGES cohort, the influence of alcohol consumption on GC risk was significantly altered by the PRS-GC and exhibited a synergistic interaction effect. PRS-Alcohol itself shows a negative correlation with GC risk. However, when actual alcohol consumption significantly exceeded genetically predicted levels, the risk of alcohol-related GC was notably increased (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.72). Heavy drinkers in the high–PRS-GC/low–PRS-Alcohol group had a 2.16 times higher risk of GC than non-to-light drinkers, which was prominent in males. Conclusion Korean drinkers with higher PRS-GC who consume alcohol more than genetically predicted levels are susceptible to GC. PRS-GC and PRS-Alcohol may be beneficial for assessing the impact of alcohol consumption on GC risk in Koreans.

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.