Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits significant sex disparities in incidence, yet its molecular mechanisms remain unclear. We explored the role of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) genetic alterations and hepatitis B virus (HBV) integration, both known major contributors to HCC, in sex-specific risk for HBV-related HCC. Methods: We examined 310 HBV-related HCC tissues to investigate sex-specific TERT promoter (TERT-pro) mutations and HBV integration profiles, stratified by sex and age, and validated with single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Results: Tumors predominantly exhibited TERT-pro mutations (26.0% vs. 0%) and HBV-TERT integration (37.0% vs. 3.0%) compared to non-tumorous tissues. While TERT-pro mutations increased with age in both sexes, younger males (≤60 years) showed marked predominance compared to younger females. Males had significantly more HBV integrations at younger ages, while females initially had fewer integrations that gradually increased with age. Younger males' integrations showed significantly greater enrichment in the TERT locus compared to younger females, alongside a preference for promoters, PreS/S regions, and CpG islands. Overall, TERT genetic alterations were significantly sex-differential in younger individuals (75.3% in males vs. 23.1% in females) but not in older individuals (76.9% vs. 83.3%, respectively). These alterations were associated with increased TERT expression. The skewed TERT abnormalities in younger males were further corroborated by independent scRNA-seq data. Conclusions Our findings highlight the critical role of TERT alterations and HBV integration patterns in the male predominance of HCC incidence among younger HBV carriers, offering insights for future exploration to optimize sex-specific patient care and HCC surveillance strategies.

Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits significant sex disparities in incidence, yet its molecular mechanisms remain unclear. We explored the role of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) genetic alterations and hepatitis B virus (HBV) integration, both known major contributors to HCC, in sex-specific risk for HBV-related HCC. Methods: We examined 310 HBV-related HCC tissues to investigate sex-specific TERT promoter (TERT-pro) mutations and HBV integration profiles, stratified by sex and age, and validated with single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Results: Tumors predominantly exhibited TERT-pro mutations (26.0% vs. 0%) and HBV-TERT integration (37.0% vs. 3.0%) compared to non-tumorous tissues. While TERT-pro mutations increased with age in both sexes, younger males (≤60 years) showed marked predominance compared to younger females. Males had significantly more HBV integrations at younger ages, while females initially had fewer integrations that gradually increased with age. Younger males' integrations showed significantly greater enrichment in the TERT locus compared to younger females, alongside a preference for promoters, PreS/S regions, and CpG islands. Overall, TERT genetic alterations were significantly sex-differential in younger individuals (75.3% in males vs. 23.1% in females) but not in older individuals (76.9% vs. 83.3%, respectively). These alterations were associated with increased TERT expression. The skewed TERT abnormalities in younger males were further corroborated by independent scRNA-seq data. Conclusions Our findings highlight the critical role of TERT alterations and HBV integration patterns in the male predominance of HCC incidence among younger HBV carriers, offering insights for future exploration to optimize sex-specific patient care and HCC surveillance strategies.

Background/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibits significant sex disparities in incidence, yet its molecular mechanisms remain unclear. We explored the role of telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) genetic alterations and hepatitis B virus (HBV) integration, both known major contributors to HCC, in sex-specific risk for HBV-related HCC. Methods: We examined 310 HBV-related HCC tissues to investigate sex-specific TERT promoter (TERT-pro) mutations and HBV integration profiles, stratified by sex and age, and validated with single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data. Results: Tumors predominantly exhibited TERT-pro mutations (26.0% vs. 0%) and HBV-TERT integration (37.0% vs. 3.0%) compared to non-tumorous tissues. While TERT-pro mutations increased with age in both sexes, younger males (≤60 years) showed marked predominance compared to younger females. Males had significantly more HBV integrations at younger ages, while females initially had fewer integrations that gradually increased with age. Younger males' integrations showed significantly greater enrichment in the TERT locus compared to younger females, alongside a preference for promoters, PreS/S regions, and CpG islands. Overall, TERT genetic alterations were significantly sex-differential in younger individuals (75.3% in males vs. 23.1% in females) but not in older individuals (76.9% vs. 83.3%, respectively). These alterations were associated with increased TERT expression. The skewed TERT abnormalities in younger males were further corroborated by independent scRNA-seq data. Conclusions Our findings highlight the critical role of TERT alterations and HBV integration patterns in the male predominance of HCC incidence among younger HBV carriers, offering insights for future exploration to optimize sex-specific patient care and HCC surveillance strategies.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

Background/Aims: Bile duct invasion (BDI) is rarely observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), leading to hyperbilirubinemia. However, the efficacy of pretreatment biliary drainage for HCC patients with BDI and obstructive jaundice is currently unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of biliary drainage on the prognosis of these patients. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled a total of 200 HCC patients with BDI from multicenter cohorts. Patients without obstructive jaundice (n=99) and those who did not undergo HCC treatment (n=37) were excluded from further analysis. Finally, 64 patients with obstructive jaundice (43 subjected to drainage and 21 not subjected to drainage) were included. Propensity score matching was then conducted. Results: The biliary drainage group showed longer overall survival (median 10.13 months vs 4.43 months, p=0.004) and progression-free survival durations (median 7.00 months vs 1.97 months, p<0.001) than the non-drainage group. Multivariate analysis showed that biliary drainage was a significantly favorable prognostic factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.42; p=0.006) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.30; p<0.001). Furthermore, in the evaluation of first response after HCC treatment, biliary drainage was beneficial (p=0.005). Remarkably, the durations of overall survival (p=0.032) and progression-free survival (p=0.004) were similar after propensity score matching. Conclusions Biliary drainage is an independent favorable prognostic factor for HCC patients with BDI and obstructive jaundice. Therefore, biliary drainage should be contemplated in the treatment of advanced HCC with BDI to improve survival outcomes.

Background: Hand hygiene is considered the simplest and most cost-effective method of infection prevention. Regular observation and feedback on hand hygiene compliance are key strategies for its enhancement. This study evaluated the effectiveness of hand hygiene surveillance, including direct observation and feedback, by comprehensively analyzing the reported hand hygiene compliance within the Korean National Healthcare-Associated Infections Surveillance System from 2019 to 2022. Methods: Participating medical institutions included general hospitals and hospitals with infection control departments that consented to participate. Hand hygiene surveillance was conducted using direct observation. Collected data, including healthcare workers, clinical areas, hand hygiene moments, and hand hygiene compliance, were recorded to calculate hand hygiene compliance rates. Additionally, the volume of alcohol-based hand sanitizers used per patient per day was investigated as an indirect indicator of hand hygiene compliance. The study was conducted from July 2019 to December 2022. Results: Hand hygiene compliance increased from 87.2% in Q3 2019 to 89.9% in 2022. Nurses and medical technologists showed the highest compliance rates, whereas doctors showed the lowest compliance rates. Intensive care units excelled in compliance, whereas emergency de partments lagged. Compliance was highest after patient contact and lowest when the patient’s surroundings were touched. Larger hospitals consumed more alcohol-based hand sanitizers than smaller hospitals did. Conclusion This study confirmed an improvement in hand hygiene compliance through sustained surveillance, indicating its contribution not only to preventing infection transfer within healthcare facilities but also to fostering a culture of hand hygiene in the country.

Objective: This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Methods: This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment. Results: The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (−22.9±2.6% vs. −15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and −24.2±2.5% vs. −12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups. Conclusion Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy.