Purpose: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has long been recognized as an effective treatment for depression and suicidality.Virtual reality (VR) technology is widely used for cognitive training for conditions such as anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, but little research has considered VR-based CBT for depressive symptoms and suicidality. We tested the effectiveness and safety of a VR-based CBT program for depressive disorders. Materials and Methods: We recruited 57 participants from May 2022 through February 2023 using online advertisements. This multi-center, assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled exploratory trial used two groups: VR treatment group and treat as usual (TAU) group. VR treatment group received a VR mental health training/education program. TAU group received standard pharmacotherapy. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately after the 6-week treatment period, and 4 weeks after the end of the treatment period in each group. Results: Depression scores decreased significantly over time in both VR treatment and TAU groups, with no differences between the two groups. The suicidality score decreased significantly only in VR group. No group differences were found in the remission or response rate for depression, perceived stress, or clinical severity. No adverse events or motion sickness occurred during the VR treatment program. Conclusion VR CBT treatment for major depressive disorder has the potential to be equivalent to the gold-standard pharmacotherapy in reducing depressive symptoms, suicidality, and related clinical symptoms, with no difference in improvement found in this study. Thus, VR-based CBT might be an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy for depressive disorders.

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: Sclerostin, initially recognized for its pivotal role in bone metabolism, has gained attention for its multifaceted impact on overall human health. However, its influence on frailty—a condition that best reflects biological age—has not been thoroughly investigated. Methods: We collected blood samples from 244 older adults who underwent comprehensive geriatric assessments. Sclerostin levels were quantified using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Frailty was assessed using two validated approaches: the phenotypic model by Fried and the deficit accumulation frailty index (FI) by Rockwood. Results: After controlling for sex, age, and body mass index, we found that serum sclerostin levels were significantly elevated in frail individuals compared to their robust counterparts (P<0.001). There was a positive correlation between serum sclerostin concentrations and the FI (P<0.001). Each standard deviation increase in serum sclerostin was associated with an odds ratio of 1.87 for frailty (P=0.003). Moreover, participants in the highest quartile of sclerostin levels had a significantly higher FI and a 9.91-fold increased odds of frailty compared to those in the lowest quartile (P=0.003 and P=0.039, respectively). Conclusion These findings, which for the first time explore the association between circulating sclerostin levels and frailty, have significant clinical implications, positioning sclerostin as one of potential blood-based biomarkers for frailty that captures the comprehensive physical, mental, and social aspects of the elderly, extending beyond its traditional role in bone metabolism.

Background: and Purpose The National Brain Biobank of Korea (NBBK) is a brain bank consortium supported by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and the Korea National Institute of Health, and was launched in 2015 to support research into neurodegenerative disease dementia (NDD). This study aimed to introduce the NBBK and describes clinicopathological correlations based on analyses of data collected from the NBBK. Methods: Four hospital-based brain banks have been established in South Korea: Samsung Medical Center Brain Bank (SMCBB), Seoul National University Hospital Brain Bank (SNUHBB), Pusan National University Hospital Brain Bank (PNUHBB), and Myongji Hospital Brain Bank (MJHBB). Clinical and pathological data were collected from these brain banks using standardized protocols. The prevalence rates of clinical and pathological diagnoses were analyzed in order to characterize the clinicopathological correlations. Results: Between August 2016 and December 2023, 185 brain specimens were collected and pathologically evaluated (SNUHBB: 117; PNUHBB: 27; SMCBB: 34; MJHBB: 7). The age at consent was 70.8±12.6 years, and the age at autopsy was 71.7±12.4 years. The four-most-common clinical diagnoses were Alzheimer’s disease (AD) dementia (20.0%), idiopathic Parkinson’s disease (15.1%), unspecified dementia (11.9%), and cognitively unimpaired (CU) (11.4%).Most cases of unspecified dementia had a pathological diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) vasculopathy (31.8%) or AD (31.8%). Remarkably, only 14.2% of CU cases had normal pathological findings. The three-most-common pathological diagnoses were AD (26.5%), CNS vasculopathy (14.1%), and Lewy body disease (13.5%). Conclusions These clinical and neuropathological findings provide a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying NDD in South Korea.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

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.