Accessory breast tissue can appear along the mammary ridge, extending from the axilla to the groin, with the axilla being the most common site. Malignancies arising in accessory breast tissue are rare, representing approximately 0.3%–0.6% of all breast cancer cases.When evaluating accessory breasts, it is essential to apply the same management strategies used for conventionally positioned breasts. This report presents a case of ductal carcinoma in situ originating from accessory breast tissue in the axilla of a 55-year-old woman. The diagnosis was established through a comprehensive assessment involving mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging. Since the axillary accessory breast tissue wasn’t initially included in the routine mammography, we added an axillary tail view to evaluate the extent and morphology of malignant microcalcifications.

Accessory breast tissue can appear along the mammary ridge, extending from the axilla to the groin, with the axilla being the most common site. Malignancies arising in accessory breast tissue are rare, representing approximately 0.3%–0.6% of all breast cancer cases.When evaluating accessory breasts, it is essential to apply the same management strategies used for conventionally positioned breasts. This report presents a case of ductal carcinoma in situ originating from accessory breast tissue in the axilla of a 55-year-old woman. The diagnosis was established through a comprehensive assessment involving mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging. Since the axillary accessory breast tissue wasn’t initially included in the routine mammography, we added an axillary tail view to evaluate the extent and morphology of malignant microcalcifications.

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.

Accessory breast tissue can appear along the mammary ridge, extending from the axilla to the groin, with the axilla being the most common site. Malignancies arising in accessory breast tissue are rare, representing approximately 0.3%–0.6% of all breast cancer cases.When evaluating accessory breasts, it is essential to apply the same management strategies used for conventionally positioned breasts. This report presents a case of ductal carcinoma in situ originating from accessory breast tissue in the axilla of a 55-year-old woman. The diagnosis was established through a comprehensive assessment involving mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging. Since the axillary accessory breast tissue wasn’t initially included in the routine mammography, we added an axillary tail view to evaluate the extent and morphology of malignant microcalcifications.

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.

OBJECTIVES: We developed and validated the Health Literacy Index for the Community (HLIC) to assess the health literacy of the Korean population within the framework of the Korean National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey. METHODS: The HLIC was developed through (1) defining the conceptual framework and generating the item pool and (2) finalizing the items and identifying the cut-off value. Interviews were conducted to examine items’ face validity, and a cross-sectional survey was performed to analyze the item-response theory and Rasch models to investigate the instrument’s psychometric properties. RESULTS: In this study of 1,041 participants, most had no difficulty understanding health information; however, 67.9% struggled to assess the reliability of health information from the Internet or media. A 4-factor structure was identified through factor analysis, leading to the exclusion of some items. This resulted in 10 items across 4 domains: (1) disease prevention, (2) health promotion, (3) health care, and (4) technology and resources. The HLIC demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s α of 0.87. It also showed high test-retest reliability and correlations with other health literacy instruments. A socio-demographic analysis of the HLIC revealed disparities in health literacy across various age groups, education levels, and income brackets. CONCLUSIONS The HLIC was developed to systematically measure health literacy in Korea’s general population. Its simplicity and conciseness ensure reliability and validity and improve its accessibility, making it particularly suitable for the broader Korean population, including those with lower literacy levels.

Background: Currently, non-vitamin K-antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) monotherapy has been suggested as the optimal antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) beyond one year after coronary revascularization. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between NOAC monotherapy and NOAC plus antiplatelet combination therapy using realworld data. Methods: Between 2015 and 2020, patients with AF who had received NOACs beyond one year after coronary revascularization were enrolled from Korean national insurance data. We emulated a pragmatic sequence of trials between the NOAC monotherapy and the antiplatelet combination therapy followed by propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Results: Among 206,407 person-trials from 4,465 individuals, we compared 3,275 pairs of the monotherapy and the matched combination therapy. During a median follow-up of 1.24 years, the incidence rate of MACCE was 19.4% and 20.0% per patient-year in the monotherapy group and the antiplatelet combination group, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–1.05; P = 0.422). Compared with the antiplatelet combination group, the monotherapy group had a significantly lower incidence rate of major bleeding, defined as intracranial bleeding or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization (2.8% vs. 3.6% per patient-year; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62–0.97; P = 0.024). Conclusion As an antithrombotic therapy for AF beyond one year after coronary revascularization, NOAC monotherapy was associated with a similar risk of MACCE and a lower risk of major bleeding compared to NOAC plus antiplatelet combination therapy.

OBJECTIVES: We developed and validated the Health Literacy Index for the Community (HLIC) to assess the health literacy of the Korean population within the framework of the Korean National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey. METHODS: The HLIC was developed through (1) defining the conceptual framework and generating the item pool and (2) finalizing the items and identifying the cut-off value. Interviews were conducted to examine items’ face validity, and a cross-sectional survey was performed to analyze the item-response theory and Rasch models to investigate the instrument’s psychometric properties. RESULTS: In this study of 1,041 participants, most had no difficulty understanding health information; however, 67.9% struggled to assess the reliability of health information from the Internet or media. A 4-factor structure was identified through factor analysis, leading to the exclusion of some items. This resulted in 10 items across 4 domains: (1) disease prevention, (2) health promotion, (3) health care, and (4) technology and resources. The HLIC demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s α of 0.87. It also showed high test-retest reliability and correlations with other health literacy instruments. A socio-demographic analysis of the HLIC revealed disparities in health literacy across various age groups, education levels, and income brackets. CONCLUSIONS The HLIC was developed to systematically measure health literacy in Korea’s general population. Its simplicity and conciseness ensure reliability and validity and improve its accessibility, making it particularly suitable for the broader Korean population, including those with lower literacy levels.