Objectives: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a chronic inflammation of the nasal mucosa triggered by environmental allergens. Although its pathophysiology has been extensively investigated, the influence of environmental aggravating factors—particularly combined pollutant exposure—remains insufficiently characterized. This study aimed to assess the impact of coexposure to PM2.5, formaldehyde, and Zn on allergic inflammation in a murine AR model and to delineate the associated immunological and histopathological responses. Methods: Female BALB/c mice were sensitized with ovalbumin (OVA) and challenged intranasally to induce AR. On days 21–24, the mice were exposed to PM2.5, formaldehyde, and Zn, either individually or in combination with OVA. Allergic symptoms were evaluated through behavioral observation, while immune responses were assessed by analyzing nasal and bronchoalveolar lavage fluids (NALF and BALF), serum immunoglobulin levels, nasal histopathology, and cytokine profiles. Results: Combined exposure to PM2.5, formaldehyde, and Zn significantly intensified allergic inflammation compared with single exposures. Coexposure to PM2.5 and Zn led to synergistic increases in total and OVA-specific immunoglobulin E levels, eosinophilic infiltration, nasal rubbing, sneezing, and Th2/Th17 cytokine levels in NALF and BALF. Histological analysis demonstrated epithelial thickening and goblet cell hyperplasia after combined exposure. Other combinations, including PM2.5 with formaldehyde, also produced additive or modestly amplified inflammatory responses. Conclusions Coexposure to PM2.5, formaldehyde, and Zn aggravated allergic inflammation in an OVA-induced murine model, with PM2.5+Zn yielding the strongest synergistic effects. These findings emphasize the role of pollutant–pollutant interactions in allergic airway diseases and highlight the need for further research to clarify long-term health effects and relevance to human disease.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Canine adenovirus type 2 (CAV-2) is a common causative agent of respiratory disease in canines. There have been no reports of CAV-2 variants isolated from raccoon dogs. This study aims to investigate the biological and genetic characteristics of a novel Korean CAV-2 variant. Madin-Darby canine kidney cells were used to isolate the CAV-2 variant from 45 fecal swab samples. Diagnostic tools such as the cytopathic effect (CPE) assay, electron microscopy, polymerase chain reaction, and immunofluorescence and hemagglutination assays were used to confirm the presence of the CAV-2 isolate. A cross-virus neutralization assay was performed to verify the novelty of this CAV variant. Genetic analysis was performed using nucleotide sequences obtained through next-generation sequencing. The isolate was confirmed to be a CAV-2 variant based on the aforementioned methods and designated CAV2232. The number of bases in the fiber and E3 genes of CAV2232 were 1,626 and 414, respectively. Phylogenetic analysis of the fiber and E3 genes confirmed that CAV2232 was classified into a different clade from the known CAV-1 and CAV-2 strains. Mice inoculated with the CAV2232 vaccine developed high virus neutralization antibody titers of 1,024 (210) against CAV2232, while mice inoculated with CAV-1 and CAV-2 vaccines had low virus neutralization antibody titers of 12.9 (23.7) and 6.5 (22.7), respectively, against CAV2232. CAV2232 isolated from wild raccoon dog feces was classified as a novel CAV-2 variant. CAV2232 may therefore be used as an antigen for new vaccine development and serological investigations.

Purpose: The number of patients presenting with vaccination-related cardiovascular symptoms after receiving mRNA vaccines (mRNA-VRCS) is increasing. We investigated the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events (VAEs), including myocarditis and pericarditis, in patients with mRNA-VRCS after receiving BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273-Moderna vaccines. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS who visited the outpatient clinic of two tertiary medical centers. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, echocardiographic findings, and electrocardiographic findings were evaluated. VAE was defined as myocarditis or pericarditis in patients after mRNA vaccination. Clinical outcomes during short-term follow-up, including emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death, were also assessed among the patients. Results: A total of 952 patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS were included in this study, with 89.7% receiving Pfizer-BioNTech and 10.3% receiving Moderna vaccines. The mean duration from vaccination to symptom was 5.6±7.5 days. VAEs, including acute myocarditis and acute pericarditis, were confirmed in 11 (1.2%) and 10 (1.1%) patients, respectively. The VAE group showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiography changes, and ST-T segment changes. During the short-term follow-up period of 3 months, the VAE group showed a higher hospitalization rate compared to the control group; there was no significant difference in ER visit (p=0.320) or mortality rates (p>0.999). Conclusion Amongst the patients who experienced mRNA-VRCS, the total incidence of VAEs, including acute myocarditis and pericarditis, was 2.2%. Patients with VAEs showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiographic changes, and ST-T segment changes compared to those without VAEs. With or without the cardiovascular events, the prognosis in patients with mRNA-VRCS was favorable.

Purpose: The number of patients presenting with vaccination-related cardiovascular symptoms after receiving mRNA vaccines (mRNA-VRCS) is increasing. We investigated the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events (VAEs), including myocarditis and pericarditis, in patients with mRNA-VRCS after receiving BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273-Moderna vaccines. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS who visited the outpatient clinic of two tertiary medical centers. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, echocardiographic findings, and electrocardiographic findings were evaluated. VAE was defined as myocarditis or pericarditis in patients after mRNA vaccination. Clinical outcomes during short-term follow-up, including emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death, were also assessed among the patients. Results: A total of 952 patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS were included in this study, with 89.7% receiving Pfizer-BioNTech and 10.3% receiving Moderna vaccines. The mean duration from vaccination to symptom was 5.6±7.5 days. VAEs, including acute myocarditis and acute pericarditis, were confirmed in 11 (1.2%) and 10 (1.1%) patients, respectively. The VAE group showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiography changes, and ST-T segment changes. During the short-term follow-up period of 3 months, the VAE group showed a higher hospitalization rate compared to the control group; there was no significant difference in ER visit (p=0.320) or mortality rates (p>0.999). Conclusion Amongst the patients who experienced mRNA-VRCS, the total incidence of VAEs, including acute myocarditis and pericarditis, was 2.2%. Patients with VAEs showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiographic changes, and ST-T segment changes compared to those without VAEs. With or without the cardiovascular events, the prognosis in patients with mRNA-VRCS was favorable.

Background and Objectives: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middleaged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. Results: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs.10.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980–1.064; p=0.309).Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460–0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. Conclusions Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.