Background: Cough is a prominent symptom of chronic respiratory diseases, including asthma, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and bronchiectasis (BE). Some patients develop chronic cough (CC), defined as lasting more than 8 weeks, yet its characteristics remain poorly understood. This study aimed to characterize CC across various chronic respiratory diseases using validated cough assessment tools. Methods: The Cough Assessment in Chronic Respiratory Diseases (COASESS) study, a multicenter, prospective cross-sectional study, was conducted at 10 university hospitals. CC was evaluated in terms of intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]), frequency (cough symptom score [CSS]), and quality of life (using the cough assessment test [COAT] and Leicester cough questionnaire [LCQ]). Cough hypersensitivity was assessed with the cough hypersensitivity questionnaire (CHQ). Data on age, sex, and smoking status were also collected. Results: Among the 303 enrolled patients, 266 with chronic respiratory diseases were included in the analysis. Patients with asthma were younger, predominantly female, and non-smokers, whereas those with COPD and IPF were older males who had previously smoked (p<0.001). Scores for COAT, LCQ, NRS, and CSS showed significant differences across the diseases, with asthma and IPF patients experiencing a greater symptom burden and lower quality of life compared to those with COPD or BE (p<0.001). Although CHQ total scores were similar across groups, asthma patients more frequently reported triggers such as talking and post-nasal drip. Conclusion This study revealed distinct characteristics of CC across different chronic respiratory diseases. Asthma and IPF were associated with a higher symptom burden, and cough hypersensitivity varied depending on the underlying condition. These findings highlight the necessity for disease-specific assessments and management strategies for CC.

Background: Asthma remission has recently emerged as an aspirational treatment goal, yet its definition remains inconsistent across studies and expert groups. The absence of a standardized framework hampers its application in clinical practice and research, particularly in Korea where biologics use is rapidly increasing. This study aimed to establish a consensus definition of clinical remission in severe asthma among Korean experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey, followed by a focused third round, was conducted among 28 board-certified pulmonologists from the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases (KATRD). The questionnaire consisted of six domains and 27 items. Responses were analyzed using agreement rates, interquartile ranges, and content validity ratios to determine consensus levels. Results: Consensus was reached on defining clinical remission as a composite of no exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use, sustained symptom control (Asthma Control Test ≥20 on at least three occasions over 12 months), and stabilization and optimization of pulmonary function while on maintenance treatment. Experts agreed that pulmonary function should be assessed based on clinical judgment rather than absolute thresholds. Complete remission was additionally defined as fulfilling all clinical remission criteria with normalization of type 2 inflammation (blood eosinophils <300/μL and fractional exhaled nitric oxide <25 ppb). Conclusion This Delphi consensus provides a regionally relevant and pragmatic framework for defining remission in severe asthma. These statements may help guide clinical practice, inform guideline development, and support future research on remission as a treatment goal.

Background: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus and early-onset dementia (EOD), defined as dementia diagnosed at an age <65 years, is increasing worldwide, with significant socioeconomic implications. We investigated the association between diabetes, prediabetes, and EOD, focusing on the influence of diabetes duration on EOD risk. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we analyzed data from 1,979,509 patients aged 40–60 years who underwent health checkups in 2009. Patients were categorized into five groups: normal, impaired fasting glucose (IFG), newly diagnosed diabetes, diabetes duration <5 years, and diabetes duration ≥5 years. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for EOD after adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Results: During the observation period (mean 7.75 years), 8,921 patients with EOD were identified. The diabetes group demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of EOD compared to the normal group (aHR, 1.334; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.226 to 1.451). EOD risk increased with longer diabetes duration, with the highest risk observed in patients with diabetes ≥5 years (aHR, 1.543; 95% CI, 1.368 to 1.741). No significant difference was observed between the IFG and normal groups (aHR, 0.989; 95% CI, 0.938 to 1.043). Additionally, the hypertension group exhibited a significantly higher incidence of EOD compared to the non-hypertension group (aHR, 1.364; 95% CI, 1.291 to 1.442). Conclusion Diabetes is independently associated with increased risk of EOD, and this risk increases with longer diabetes duration. This association remained significant regardless of the presence and duration of hypertension.

Background: Menopausal status can increase the risk of cardiocerebrovascular diseases (CCVDs) in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Regular exercise is well-known to reduce this risk. This study explored the impact of exercise on CCVD and mortality in women with T2DM according to their menopausal status. Methods: A total of 32,477 premenopausal and 53,690 postmenopausal Korean women with T2DM aged 40 to 60 years from a national health examination cohort (2009 to 2018) were included. We evaluated risks for stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and mortality based on exercise intensity. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were performed to obtain the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval. Results: Exercise reduced stroke, MI, and mortality risks in women with T2DM, regardless of menopausal status. The highest effects of aHR compared to the sedentary group were 0.68 for stroke, 0.66 for MI, and 0.81 for mortality. Postmenopausal women experienced significant MI risk reductions at most exercise intensities, with the greatest reduction in the ≥1,500 metabolic equivalent of task score group unlike premenopausal women. However, stroke and mortality risk reductions in postmenopausal women were less pronounced compared to premenopausal women. Conclusion Exercise reduces CCVD risk in women with T2DM across menopausal status. Postmenopausal women with T2DM had more benefits from exercise on MI but fewer benefits on stroke and mortality than premenopausal women. In premenopausal women with T2DM, exercise was not associated with a lower MI risk.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background/Aims: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, was developed for treating acid-related disorders. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fexuprazan, unlike those of proton pump inhibitors, are independent of food effect. This study aims to evaluate differences in efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) according to the timing of dosing. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label noninferiority study, patients who had typical reflux symptoms with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg daily 30 minutes before or after meal. Treatment was completed after 2 weeks or 4 weeks when healing was endoscopically confirmed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 4. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: In the prior-to-meal group (n = 89) and after-meal group (n = 86), 4-week EE healing rates were 98.77% and 100.00% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.01% to 0.04%) and 2-week EE healing rates were 95.77% and 97.14% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.05% to 0.07%), respectively. TEAEs were 9.78% and 8.70% in the prior-to-meal group and the after-meal group, respectively. Conclusions Non-inferiority analysis revealed that taking fexuprazan after meal was non-inferior to taking fexuprazan before meals in patients with EE. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups. The drug is safe and effective for healing EE regardless of the timing of dosing.

Background/Aims: Fexuprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, was developed for treating acid-related disorders. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of fexuprazan, unlike those of proton pump inhibitors, are independent of food effect. This study aims to evaluate differences in efficacy and safety of fexuprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) according to the timing of dosing. Methods: In this multicenter, open-label noninferiority study, patients who had typical reflux symptoms with endoscopically confirmed EE were randomized 1:1 to receive fexuprazan 40 mg daily 30 minutes before or after meal. Treatment was completed after 2 weeks or 4 weeks when healing was endoscopically confirmed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy up to week 4. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: In the prior-to-meal group (n = 89) and after-meal group (n = 86), 4-week EE healing rates were 98.77% and 100.00% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.01% to 0.04%) and 2-week EE healing rates were 95.77% and 97.14% (difference, 0.01%; 95% CI, –0.05% to 0.07%), respectively. TEAEs were 9.78% and 8.70% in the prior-to-meal group and the after-meal group, respectively. Conclusions Non-inferiority analysis revealed that taking fexuprazan after meal was non-inferior to taking fexuprazan before meals in patients with EE. The frequency of adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups. The drug is safe and effective for healing EE regardless of the timing of dosing.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.