ObjectiveThis study used a national sample cohort database to investigate the risk of osteoporotic fractures after gastrectomy is performed for gastric cancer.Materials and MethodsWe used data from the Korea National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort between 2002 and 2019. After performing 1:3 propensity score matching, 28,328 individuals were analysed in the final study (7, 082 cases; 21, 246 controls). Gastrectomy data were extracted from the coded claims data, and osteoporotic fractures were defined as the occurrence of fractures in any of the vertebrae, distal radius, humerus, or hip, according to the 10th version of the International Classification of Diseases. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was generated to investigate the association between gastrectomy and risk of osteoporotic fractures.ResultsPatients with gastric cancer who underwent a gastrectomy had a higher risk of osteoporotic fractures as compared to the general population (men, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-1.27; women, HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.06-1.30). A significantly higher risk of osteoporotic fractures was observed with surgical resection than with endoscopic resection (men, surgical, HR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08-1.52, endoscopic, HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.90-1.21; women, surgical, HR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11-1.62, endoscopic, HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.27). In men, the risk of hip fracture was the highest among the four fracture sites (HR: 1.18, 95% CI:0.89-1.56), while in women, the risk of vertebral fracture after gastrectomy was the highest (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.99-1.35).ConclusionPatients with gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy had a higher risk of osteoporotic fractures as compared to the general population. This suggests the need for bone metabolism management in patients with gastric cancer to prevent post-gastrectomy complications.

Background The gap in treatment and health outcomes after diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is a major public health concern. We aimed to investigate the differences in the health outcomes and treatment of pancreatic cancer patients in healthcare vulnerable and non-vulnerable areas. Methods This retrospective cohort study evaluated data from the Korea National Health Insurance Corporation-National Sample Cohort from 2002 to 2019. The position value for relative comparison index was used to define healthcare vulnerable areas. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the risk of mortality in pancreatic cancer patients according to healthcare vulnerable areas, and multiple logistic regression was used to estimate the difference in treatment. Results Among 1,975 patients, 279 (14.1%) and 1,696 (85.9%) lived in the healthcare vulnerable and non-vulnerable areas, respectively. Compared with the non-vulnerable area, pancreatic cancer patients in the vulnerable area had a higher risk of death at 3 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06–1.67) and 6 months (HR: 1.23, 95% CI = 1.03–1.48). In addition, patients with pancreatic cancer in the vulnerable area were less likely to receive treatment than patients in the non-vulnerable area (odds ratio [OR]: 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52–0.94). This trend was further emphasized for chemotherapy (OR: 0.68, 95% CI = 0.48–0.95). Conclusion Patients with pancreatic cancer belonging to medically disadvantaged areas receive less treatment and have a higher risk of death. This may be a result of the late diagnosis of pancreatic cancer among these patients.

ImportanceWhile various policies to support couples experiencing infertility have been introduced due to the fertility rate rapidly dropping in developed countries, few large-scale nationwide cohort studies have evaluated the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART) health insurance coverage policies.ObjectiveTo evaluate ART health insurance coverage for multiple pregnancies and births in Korea.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis population-based cohort study used delivery cohort data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. A total of 1 474 484 women were included after exclusion of those who gave birth at nonmedical institutions and those with missing data.ExposureTwo 27-month periods were examined before and after the Korean National Health Insurance Service had begun covering ART treatment (preintervention period, July 1, 2015, to September 30, 2017; postintervention period, October 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019).Main Outcomes and MeasuresMultiple pregnancies and multiple births were identified by International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis codes. Total births were defined as the total number of babies born to each pregnant woman during the follow-up period. An interrupted time series with segmented regression was conducted to analyze the time trend and its change in outcomes. Data analysis was conducted between December 2, 2022, and February 15, 2023.ResultsOf the 1 474 484 women eligible for the analysis (mean [SD] age, 33.2 [4.6] years), approximately 1.60% had multiple pregnancies and 1.10% had multiple births. After covering ART treatment, the likelihood of multiple pregnancies and multiple births was estimated to increase by 0.7% (estimate, 1.007; 95% CI, 1.004-1.011; P < .001) and 1.2% (estimate, 1.012; 95% CI, 1.007-1.016; P < .001) compared with before coverage. The probability of an increase in the number of total births per pregnant woman after the intervention was estimated to be 0.5% (estimate, 1.005; 95% CI, 1.005-1.005; P < .001). The relatively high-income class above the median income showed a decreasing trend in multiple births and total births before the intervention, but after the intervention, a significant increase was observed.Conclusions and RelevanceThis population-based cohort study found that the possibility of multiple pregnancies and births in Korea significantly increased after the implementation of an ART health insurance coverage policy. These findings suggest that the development and coverage of policies to support couples experiencing infertility may help address low fertility rates.