Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background/Aims: Globus is often linked with gastroesophageal reflux disease, which influences its treatment strategies. This study aims to investigate clinical characteristics of patients with refractory proton pump inhibitor (PPI) globus to better understand its etiology. Methods: Between 2017 and 2023, 122 out of 592 patients with globus from the Samsung Medical Center outpatient clinic who were unresponsive to 8 weeks of PPI treatment were analyzed. Patients underwent 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM). They were divided into acid reflux, non-acid reflux, and no reflux groups, with basal impedance (BI) measurements taken at 3, 9, and 15 cm along the esophagus. These values were compared against data of healthy volunteers to identify significant differences across groups. Results: The acid reflux group displayed a median impedance of 1152 Ω at 3 cm, which was significantly lower than the median impedance of the non-acid reflux group (2644 Ω) and the no-reflux group (3083 Ω) (P = 0.015). Most patients in non-acid reflux and no-reflux groups showed higher impedance levels at both 3 cm and 15 cm compared to the first quartile of healthy individuals with significant differences (P = 0.032 and P = 0.029, respectively). Proximal BI was significantly lower than distal BI in both groups: 2278 Ω vs 2644 Ω in the non-acid reflux group (P = 0.035) and 2387 Ω vs 3083 Ω in the no-reflux group (P < 0.001). Conclusions Reduced proximal BI values compared to distal BI values suggest increased permeability in globus patients. Further studies with a larger cohort of refractory PPI patients and healthy volunteers are needed to explore these findings and their implications on globus etiology.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background/Aims: Globus is often linked with gastroesophageal reflux disease, which influences its treatment strategies. This study aims to investigate clinical characteristics of patients with refractory proton pump inhibitor (PPI) globus to better understand its etiology. Methods: Between 2017 and 2023, 122 out of 592 patients with globus from the Samsung Medical Center outpatient clinic who were unresponsive to 8 weeks of PPI treatment were analyzed. Patients underwent 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM). They were divided into acid reflux, non-acid reflux, and no reflux groups, with basal impedance (BI) measurements taken at 3, 9, and 15 cm along the esophagus. These values were compared against data of healthy volunteers to identify significant differences across groups. Results: The acid reflux group displayed a median impedance of 1152 Ω at 3 cm, which was significantly lower than the median impedance of the non-acid reflux group (2644 Ω) and the no-reflux group (3083 Ω) (P = 0.015). Most patients in non-acid reflux and no-reflux groups showed higher impedance levels at both 3 cm and 15 cm compared to the first quartile of healthy individuals with significant differences (P = 0.032 and P = 0.029, respectively). Proximal BI was significantly lower than distal BI in both groups: 2278 Ω vs 2644 Ω in the non-acid reflux group (P = 0.035) and 2387 Ω vs 3083 Ω in the no-reflux group (P < 0.001). Conclusions Reduced proximal BI values compared to distal BI values suggest increased permeability in globus patients. Further studies with a larger cohort of refractory PPI patients and healthy volunteers are needed to explore these findings and their implications on globus etiology.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Background/Aims: Globus is often linked with gastroesophageal reflux disease, which influences its treatment strategies. This study aims to investigate clinical characteristics of patients with refractory proton pump inhibitor (PPI) globus to better understand its etiology. Methods: Between 2017 and 2023, 122 out of 592 patients with globus from the Samsung Medical Center outpatient clinic who were unresponsive to 8 weeks of PPI treatment were analyzed. Patients underwent 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring and high-resolution manometry (HRM). They were divided into acid reflux, non-acid reflux, and no reflux groups, with basal impedance (BI) measurements taken at 3, 9, and 15 cm along the esophagus. These values were compared against data of healthy volunteers to identify significant differences across groups. Results: The acid reflux group displayed a median impedance of 1152 Ω at 3 cm, which was significantly lower than the median impedance of the non-acid reflux group (2644 Ω) and the no-reflux group (3083 Ω) (P = 0.015). Most patients in non-acid reflux and no-reflux groups showed higher impedance levels at both 3 cm and 15 cm compared to the first quartile of healthy individuals with significant differences (P = 0.032 and P = 0.029, respectively). Proximal BI was significantly lower than distal BI in both groups: 2278 Ω vs 2644 Ω in the non-acid reflux group (P = 0.035) and 2387 Ω vs 3083 Ω in the no-reflux group (P < 0.001). Conclusions Reduced proximal BI values compared to distal BI values suggest increased permeability in globus patients. Further studies with a larger cohort of refractory PPI patients and healthy volunteers are needed to explore these findings and their implications on globus etiology.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Objectives: This study examined the changes in the characteristics of high-risk suicide groups in South Korea before and after the COVID-19 pandemic using the Korean Cohort for the Model Predicting a Suicide and Suicide-related Behavior (K-COMPASS) cohort. Methods: The K-COMPASS is a longitudinal cohort study that started in 2015. The participants included suicide attempters and individuals with suicidal ideation from various hospitals and mental health centers in South Korea. This study compared the sociodemographic and psychiatric characteristics of 800 participants from the first cohort (2015–2019) with 511 participants from the second and third cohorts (2019–2024). Data were collected through structured interviews and validated scales. Results: The second and third cohort participants were younger, had a higher proportion of females, and exhibited more severe psychiatric symptoms and higher suicidal risk than the first cohort. The prevalence of physical illnesses decreased, while the use of psychiatric medications and the severity of mental health issues increased. In addition, significant sociodemographic changes were observed, such as higher educational levels and urban residency. Conclusion Significant shifts in the characteristics of high-risk suicide groups were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the need for targeted mental health interventions focusing on younger individuals and females to prevent suicide in high-risk groups.