Background: Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator- activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined. Methods: This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months. Conclusion This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Background: There is insufficient data on the benefits of empiric antibiotic combinations for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). We aimed to investigate whether empiric antipseudomonal combination therapy with fluoroquinolones decreases mortality in patients with HAP. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to 16 tertiary and general hospitals in Korea between January 1 and December 31, 2019.Patients with risk factors for combination therapy were divided into anti-pseudomonal non-carbapenem β-lactam monotherapy and fluoroquinolone combination therapy groups.Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce selection bias. Results: In total, 631 patients with HAP were enrolled. Monotherapy was prescribed in 54.7% (n = 345) of the patients, and combination therapy was prescribed in 45.3% (n = 286).There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups (16.8% vs.18.2%, P = 0.729) or even after the PSM (17.5% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.913). After the PSM, adjusted hazard ratio for 30-day mortality from the combination therapy was 1.646 (95% confidence interval, 0.782–3.461; P = 0.189) in the Cox proportional hazards model. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the appropriateness of initial empiric antibiotics between the two groups (55.0% vs. 56.8%, P = 0.898). The proportion of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens was high in both groups. Conclusion Empiric anti-pseudomonal fluoroquinolone combination therapy showed no survival benefit compared to β-lactam monotherapy in patients with HAP. Caution is needed regarding the routine combination of fluoroquinolones in the empiric treatment of HAP patients with a high risk of MDR.

Objective: : The association between boule (BOLL) and endothelin receptor type A (EDNRA) loci and intracranial aneurysm (IA) formation has been reported via genome-wide association studies. We sought to identify genome-wide interactions involving BOLL and EDNRA loci for IA in a Korean adult cohort. Methods: : Genome-wide pairwise interaction analyses of BOLL and EDNRA involving 250 patients with IA and 296 controls were performed using the additive effect model after adjusting for confounding factors. Results: : Among 512575 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 23 and 11 common SNPs suggested a genome-wide interaction threshold (p<1.25×10-8) involving rs700651 (BOLL) and rs6841581 (EDNRA). Rather than singe SNP effect of BOLL or EDNRA on IA development, they showed a synergistic effect on IA formation via multifactorial pair-wise interactions. The rs1105980 of PTCH1 gene showed the most significant interaction with rs700651 (natural log-transformed odds ratio [lnOR], 1.53; p=6.41×10-11). The rs74585958 of RYK gene interacted strongly with rs6841581 (lnOR, -19.91; p=1.64×10-9). Although, there was no direct interaction between BOLL and EDNRA variants, two EDNRA-interacting gene variants of TNIK (rs11925024 and rs1231) and FTO (rs9302654), and one BOLL-interacting METTL4 gene variant (rs549315) exhibited marginal interaction with BOLL gene. Conclusion : BOLL or EDNRA may have a synergistic effect on IA formation via multifactorial pair-wise interactions.

Malaria continues to be one of the most crucial infectious burdens in endemic areas worldwide, as well as for travelers visiting malaria transmission regions. It has been reported that 8-aminoquinolines are effective against the Plasmodium species, particularly primaquine, for anti-hypnozoite therapy in P. vivax malaria. However, primaquine causes acute hemolytic anemia in individuals with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. Therefore, G6PD deficiency testing should precede hypnozoite elimination with 8-aminoquinoline. Several point-of-care devices have been developed to detect G6PD deficiency. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of a novel, quantitative G6PD diagnostics based on a metagenomic blue fluorescent protein (mBFP). We comparatively evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the G6PD diagnostic modality with standard methods using 120 human whole blood samples. The G6PD deficiency was spectrophotometrically confirmed. The performance of the G6PD quantitative test kit was compared with that of a licensed control medical device, the G6PD strip. The G6PD quantitative test kit had a sensitivity of 95% (95% confidence interval (CI): 89.3-100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 94.3-100%). This study shows that the novel diagnostic G6PD quantitative test kit could be a cost-effective and time-efficient, and universally mandated screening tool for G6PD deficiency.

Background/Aims: Most studies on hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) have been conducted in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. This study aimed to investigate the microbiological and clinical characteristics of non-ICU-acquired pneumonia (NIAP) and to identify the factors affecting clinical outcomes in Korea. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients admitted to 13 tertiary hospitals between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019. Patients diagnosed with NIAP were included in this study. To assess the prognostic factors of NIAP, the study population was classified into treatment success and failure groups. Results: Of 526 patients with HAP, 379 were diagnosed with NIAP. Overall, the identified causative pathogen rate was 34.6% in the study population. Among the isolated organisms (n = 113), gram-negative bacilli were common pathogens (n = 91), such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 25), Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 23), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 21). The multidrug resistance rates of A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, and K. pneumoniae were 91.3%, 76.0%, and 57.1%, respectively. Treatment failure was significantly associated with K. pneumoniae (odds ratio [OR], 3.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35 to 9.05; p = 0.010), respiratory viruses (OR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.34 to 10.82; p = 0.012), hematological malignancies (OR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.57 to 8.00; p = 0.002), and adjunctive corticosteroid treatment (OR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.27 to 4.52; p = 0.007). Conclusions The causative pathogens of NIAP in Korea are predominantly gram-negative bacilli with a high rate of multidrug resistance. These were not different from the common pathogens of ICU-acquired pneumonia.

Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Background: Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: From March 2014 to December 2018, data of patients with T2DM, who were treated with quadruple hypoglycemic medications for over 12 months in 11 hospitals in South Korea, were reviewed retrospectively. We compared glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels before and 12 months after quadruple treatment with OHAs. The safety, maintenance rate, and therapeutic patterns after failure of the quadruple therapy were also evaluated. Results: In total, 357 patients were enrolled for quadruple OHA therapy, and the baseline HbA1c level was 9.0%±1.3% (74.9± 14.1 mmol/mol). After 12 months, 270 patients (75.6%) adhered to the quadruple therapy and HbA1c was significantly reduced from 8.9%±1.2% to 7.8%±1.3% (mean change, –1.1%±1.2%; P<0.001). The number of patients with HbA1c <7% increased significantly from 5 to 68 (P<0.005). In addition, lipid profiles and liver enzyme levels were also improved whereas no changes in body weight. There was no significant safety issue in patients treated with quadruple OHA therapy. Conclusion This study shows the therapeutic efficacy of the quadruple OHA regimen T2DM and demonstrates that it can be an option for the management of T2DM patients who cannot use insulin or reject injectable therapy.