1.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia: Recommendations for Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine
Yeshin KIM ; Dong Woo KANG ; Geon Ha KIM ; Ko Woon KIM ; Hee-Jin KIM ; Seunghee NA ; Kee Hyung PARK ; Young Ho PARK ; Gihwan BYEON ; Jeewon SUH ; Joon Hyun SHIN ; YongSoo SHIM ; YoungSoon YANG ; Yoo Hyun UM ; Seong-il OH ; Sheng-Min WANG ; Bora YOON ; Sun Min LEE ; Juyoun LEE ; Jin San LEE ; Jae-Sung LIM ; Young Hee JUNG ; Juhee CHIN ; Hyemin JANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Yun Jeong HONG ; Hak Young RHEE ; Jae-Won JANG ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(1):1-23
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.
2.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia: Recommendations for Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine
Yeshin KIM ; Dong Woo KANG ; Geon Ha KIM ; Ko Woon KIM ; Hee-Jin KIM ; Seunghee NA ; Kee Hyung PARK ; Young Ho PARK ; Gihwan BYEON ; Jeewon SUH ; Joon Hyun SHIN ; YongSoo SHIM ; YoungSoon YANG ; Yoo Hyun UM ; Seong-il OH ; Sheng-Min WANG ; Bora YOON ; Sun Min LEE ; Juyoun LEE ; Jin San LEE ; Jae-Sung LIM ; Young Hee JUNG ; Juhee CHIN ; Hyemin JANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Yun Jeong HONG ; Hak Young RHEE ; Jae-Won JANG ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(1):1-23
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.
3.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia: Recommendations for Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine
Yeshin KIM ; Dong Woo KANG ; Geon Ha KIM ; Ko Woon KIM ; Hee-Jin KIM ; Seunghee NA ; Kee Hyung PARK ; Young Ho PARK ; Gihwan BYEON ; Jeewon SUH ; Joon Hyun SHIN ; YongSoo SHIM ; YoungSoon YANG ; Yoo Hyun UM ; Seong-il OH ; Sheng-Min WANG ; Bora YOON ; Sun Min LEE ; Juyoun LEE ; Jin San LEE ; Jae-Sung LIM ; Young Hee JUNG ; Juhee CHIN ; Hyemin JANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Yun Jeong HONG ; Hak Young RHEE ; Jae-Won JANG ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(1):1-23
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.
4.Clinical Practice Guidelines for Dementia: Recommendations for Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine
Yeshin KIM ; Dong Woo KANG ; Geon Ha KIM ; Ko Woon KIM ; Hee-Jin KIM ; Seunghee NA ; Kee Hyung PARK ; Young Ho PARK ; Gihwan BYEON ; Jeewon SUH ; Joon Hyun SHIN ; YongSoo SHIM ; YoungSoon YANG ; Yoo Hyun UM ; Seong-il OH ; Sheng-Min WANG ; Bora YOON ; Sun Min LEE ; Juyoun LEE ; Jin San LEE ; Jae-Sung LIM ; Young Hee JUNG ; Juhee CHIN ; Hyemin JANG ; Miyoung CHOI ; Yun Jeong HONG ; Hak Young RHEE ; Jae-Won JANG ;
Dementia and Neurocognitive Disorders 2025;24(1):1-23
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.
5.Clinical outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision in locally advanced rectal cancer with mesorectal fascia involvement
Jeong Ha LEE ; Nalee KIM ; Jeong Il YU ; Gyu Sang YOO ; Hee Chul PARK ; Woo-Yong LEE ; Seong Hyeon YUN ; Hee Cheol KIM ; Yong Beom CHO ; Jung Wook HUH ; Yoon Ah PARK ; Jung Kyong SHIN ; Joon Oh PARK ; Seung Tae KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeeyun LEE ; Won Ki KANG
Radiation Oncology Journal 2024;42(2):130-138
Purpose:
For the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), research on primary lesions with mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement is lacking. This study analyzed the clinical outcomes and efficacy of dose-escalated neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) to patients with LARC involving MRF.
Materials and Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 301 patients who were diagnosed with LARC involving MRF and underwent NCRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Patients who received radiotherapy (RT) doses of ≤50.4 Gy were defined as the non-boost group, while ≥54.0 Gy as the boost group. Pathological tumor response and survival outcomes, including intrapelvic recurrence-free survival (IPRFS), distant metastases-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS), were analyzed.
Results:
A total of 269 patients (89.4%) achieved a negative pathological circumferential resection margin and 104 (34.6%) had good pathological tumor regression grades. With a median follow-up of 32.4 months, IPRFS, DMFS, and OS rates at 5-years were 88.6%, 78.0%, and 91.2%, respectively. In the subgroup analysis by RT dose, the boost group included more advanced clinical stages of patients. For the non-boost group and boost group, 5-year IPRFS rates were 90.3% and 87.0% (p = 0.242), 5-year DMFS rates were 82.0% and 71.3% (p = 0.105), and 5-year OS rates were 93.0% and 80.6% (p = 0.439), respectively. Treatment related toxicity was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.211).
Conclusion
Although this retrospective study failed to confirm the efficacy of dose-escalated NCRT, favorable IPRFS and pathological complete response was achieved with NCRT followed by TME. Further studies combining patient customized RT dose with systemic therapies are needed.
6.Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes and Safety Profiles between Androgen Deprivation Therapy+Abiraterone/Prednisone and Androgen Deprivation Therapy+Docetaxel in Patients with De Novo Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer
Dong Jin PARK ; Tae Gyun KWON ; Jae Young PARK ; Jae Young JOUNG ; Hong Koo HA ; Seong Soo JEON ; Sung-Hoo HONG ; Sungchan PARK ; Seung Hwan LEE ; Jin Seon CHO ; Sung-Woo PARK ; Se Yun KWON ; Jung Ki JO ; Hong Seok PARK ; Sang-Cheol LEE ; Dong Deuk KWON ; Sun Il KIM ; Sang Hyun PARK ; Soodong KIM ; Chang Wook JEONG ; Cheol KWAK ; Seock Hwan CHOI ;
The World Journal of Men's Health 2024;42(3):620-629
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and safety profiles of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT)+abiraterone/prednisone with those of ADT+docetaxel in patients with de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).
Materials and Methods:
A web-based database system was established to collect prospective cohort data for patients with mHSPC in Korea. From May 2019 to November 2022, 928 patients with mHSPC from 15 institutions were enrolled. Among these patients, data from 122 patients who received ADT+abiraterone/prednisone or ADT+docetaxel as the primary systemic treatment for mHSPC were collected. The patients were divided into two groups: ADT+abiraterone/prednisone group (n=102) and ADT+docetaxel group (n=20). We compared the demographic characteristics, medical histories, baseline cancer status, initial laboratory tests, metastatic burden, oncological outcomes for mHSPC, progression after mHSPC treatment, adverse effects, follow-up, and survival data between the two groups.
Results:
No significant differences in the demographic characteristics, medical histories, metastatic burden, and baseline cancer status were observed between the two groups. The ADT+abiraterone/prednisone group had a lower prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression rate (7.8% vs. 30.0%; p=0.011) and lower systemic treatment discontinuation rate (22.5% vs. 45.0%; p=0.037). No significant differences in adverse effects, oncological outcomes, and total follow-up period were observed between the two groups.
Conclusions
ADT+abiraterone/prednisone had lower PSA progression and systemic treatment discontinuation rates than ADT+docetaxel. In conclusion, further studies involving larger, double-blinded randomized trials with extended follow-up periods are necessary.
7.Occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT: using the 5th and 6th Korean Working Condition Surveys
Tae-Yeon KIM ; Seong-Uk BAEK ; Myeong-Hun LIM ; Byungyoon YUN ; Domyung PAEK ; Kyung Ehi ZOH ; Kanwoo YOUN ; Yun Keun LEE ; Yangho KIM ; Jungwon KIM ; Eunsuk CHOI ; Mo-Yeol KANG ; YoonHo CHO ; Kyung-Eun LEE ; Juho SIM ; Juyeon OH ; Heejoo PARK ; Jian LEE ; Jong-Uk WON ; Yu-Min LEE ; Jin-Ha YOON
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2024;36(1):e19-
Accurate occupation classification is essential in various fields, including policy development and epidemiological studies. This study aims to develop an occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT. This study used data from the 5th and 6th Korean Working Conditions Surveys conducted in 2017 and 2020, respectively. A total of 99,665 survey participants, who were nationally representative of Korean workers, were included. We used natural language responses regarding their job responsibilities and occupational codes based on the Korean Standard Classification of Occupations (7th version, 3-digit codes). The dataset was randomly split into training and test datasets in a ratio of 7:3. The occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT was fine-tuned using the training dataset, and the model was evaluated using the test dataset. The accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score were calculated as evaluation metrics. The final model, which classified 28,996 survey participants in the test dataset into 142 occupational codes, exhibited an accuracy of 84.44%. For the evaluation metrics, the precision, recall, and F1 score of the model, calculated by weighting based on the sample size, were 0.83, 0.84, and 0.83, respectively. The model demonstrated high precision in the classification of service and sales workers yet exhibited low precision in the classification of managers. In addition, it displayed high precision in classifying occupations prominently represented in the training dataset. This study developed an occupation classification system based on DistilKoBERT, which demonstrated reasonable performance. Despite further efforts to enhance the classification accuracy, this automated occupation classification model holds promise for advancing epidemiological studies in the fields of occupational safety and health.
9.Factors Associated with Depressive Symptoms Among Public Enterprise Employees
Seong-Joon KIM ; Bo-Hyun YOON ; Hangoeunbi KANG ; Young-Hwa SEA ; Suhee PARK ; Jye-Heon SONG ; Kyungmin KIM ; Ha-Ran JUNG ; Yuran JEONG ; Hyunju YUN ; Jaegil JO
Mood and Emotion 2024;22(3):78-86
Background:
Employees with depression have complex and serious health consequences, not only for them, including reduced quality of life, but also for businesses and society, leading to social costs such as reduced productivity. This study investigated the prevalence of depressive symptoms and related factors among public enterprise employees in Naju Innovation City, Korea.
Methods:
We investigated the sociodemographic and psychosocial characteristics of 1,061 public enterprise employees. Depression, anxiety, and occupational burnout were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, and Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey, respectively. Furthermore, the impact of factors on depressive symptoms was examined using a logistic regression model.
Results:
The prevalence of overall depressive symptoms was 11.9%. High anxiety (odds ratio [OR]=12.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]=7.17-20.76; p<0.001) and exhaustion (OR=2.79; 95% CI=1.81-4.40; p<0.001) levels were significantly associated with depressive symptoms.
Conclusion
Anxiety symptoms and exhaustion were the most important factors related to depressive symptoms among the public enterprise employees. Hence, when providing an employee assistance program, the psychosocial vulnerability factors of workers with depressive symptoms should be thoroughly addressed.2
10.Occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT: using the 5th and 6th Korean Working Condition Surveys
Tae-Yeon KIM ; Seong-Uk BAEK ; Myeong-Hun LIM ; Byungyoon YUN ; Domyung PAEK ; Kyung Ehi ZOH ; Kanwoo YOUN ; Yun Keun LEE ; Yangho KIM ; Jungwon KIM ; Eunsuk CHOI ; Mo-Yeol KANG ; YoonHo CHO ; Kyung-Eun LEE ; Juho SIM ; Juyeon OH ; Heejoo PARK ; Jian LEE ; Jong-Uk WON ; Yu-Min LEE ; Jin-Ha YOON
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2024;36(1):e19-
Accurate occupation classification is essential in various fields, including policy development and epidemiological studies. This study aims to develop an occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT. This study used data from the 5th and 6th Korean Working Conditions Surveys conducted in 2017 and 2020, respectively. A total of 99,665 survey participants, who were nationally representative of Korean workers, were included. We used natural language responses regarding their job responsibilities and occupational codes based on the Korean Standard Classification of Occupations (7th version, 3-digit codes). The dataset was randomly split into training and test datasets in a ratio of 7:3. The occupation classification model based on DistilKoBERT was fine-tuned using the training dataset, and the model was evaluated using the test dataset. The accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score were calculated as evaluation metrics. The final model, which classified 28,996 survey participants in the test dataset into 142 occupational codes, exhibited an accuracy of 84.44%. For the evaluation metrics, the precision, recall, and F1 score of the model, calculated by weighting based on the sample size, were 0.83, 0.84, and 0.83, respectively. The model demonstrated high precision in the classification of service and sales workers yet exhibited low precision in the classification of managers. In addition, it displayed high precision in classifying occupations prominently represented in the training dataset. This study developed an occupation classification system based on DistilKoBERT, which demonstrated reasonable performance. Despite further efforts to enhance the classification accuracy, this automated occupation classification model holds promise for advancing epidemiological studies in the fields of occupational safety and health.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail