Purpose: 46,XX disorders of sex development (DSD) involve atypical genitalia accompanied by a normal female karyotype. This study was performed to investigate the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of patients with 46,XX DSD. Methods: The study included 34 patients with 46,XX DSD who presented with ambiguous genitalia or delayed puberty. Patients with congenital adrenal hyperplasia were excluded. Clinical phenotypes and overall outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Age at presentation ranged from birth to 40 years (median, 0.6 years), and the follow-up period ranged from 0.3 to 29.7 years (median, 8.8 years). Twenty patients were assigned female (58.8%). Etiologies included disorders of gonadal development (n=22), exogenous androgen exposure during pregnancy (n=5), association with syndromic disorders or genital anomalies (n=2), and unclassified causes (n=5). Ovotestis was the most frequent gonadal pathology (41.7%). Müllerian duct remnants were usually underdeveloped (52.9%) or absent (23.5%). Spontaneous puberty occurred in 17 of the 21 patients of pubertal age, while 9 patients required sex hormone replacement therapy. Gonadal complications were observed in 4 patients (gonadal tumors [n=3], and spontaneous gonadal rupture [n=1]), and gender dysphoria occurred in 1 patient who was assigned male. Conclusion This study described the wide phenotypic spectrum and pubertal outcome of patients with 46,XX DSD. Long-term multidisciplinary monitoring for pubertal development, fertility, gender identity, and gonadal complications is recommended.

Purpose: 46,XX disorders of sex development (DSD) involve atypical genitalia accompanied by a normal female karyotype. This study was performed to investigate the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of patients with 46,XX DSD. Methods: The study included 34 patients with 46,XX DSD who presented with ambiguous genitalia or delayed puberty. Patients with congenital adrenal hyperplasia were excluded. Clinical phenotypes and overall outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Age at presentation ranged from birth to 40 years (median, 0.6 years), and the follow-up period ranged from 0.3 to 29.7 years (median, 8.8 years). Twenty patients were assigned female (58.8%). Etiologies included disorders of gonadal development (n=22), exogenous androgen exposure during pregnancy (n=5), association with syndromic disorders or genital anomalies (n=2), and unclassified causes (n=5). Ovotestis was the most frequent gonadal pathology (41.7%). Müllerian duct remnants were usually underdeveloped (52.9%) or absent (23.5%). Spontaneous puberty occurred in 17 of the 21 patients of pubertal age, while 9 patients required sex hormone replacement therapy. Gonadal complications were observed in 4 patients (gonadal tumors [n=3], and spontaneous gonadal rupture [n=1]), and gender dysphoria occurred in 1 patient who was assigned male. Conclusion This study described the wide phenotypic spectrum and pubertal outcome of patients with 46,XX DSD. Long-term multidisciplinary monitoring for pubertal development, fertility, gender identity, and gonadal complications is recommended.

Purpose: 46,XX disorders of sex development (DSD) involve atypical genitalia accompanied by a normal female karyotype. This study was performed to investigate the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of patients with 46,XX DSD. Methods: The study included 34 patients with 46,XX DSD who presented with ambiguous genitalia or delayed puberty. Patients with congenital adrenal hyperplasia were excluded. Clinical phenotypes and overall outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Age at presentation ranged from birth to 40 years (median, 0.6 years), and the follow-up period ranged from 0.3 to 29.7 years (median, 8.8 years). Twenty patients were assigned female (58.8%). Etiologies included disorders of gonadal development (n=22), exogenous androgen exposure during pregnancy (n=5), association with syndromic disorders or genital anomalies (n=2), and unclassified causes (n=5). Ovotestis was the most frequent gonadal pathology (41.7%). Müllerian duct remnants were usually underdeveloped (52.9%) or absent (23.5%). Spontaneous puberty occurred in 17 of the 21 patients of pubertal age, while 9 patients required sex hormone replacement therapy. Gonadal complications were observed in 4 patients (gonadal tumors [n=3], and spontaneous gonadal rupture [n=1]), and gender dysphoria occurred in 1 patient who was assigned male. Conclusion This study described the wide phenotypic spectrum and pubertal outcome of patients with 46,XX DSD. Long-term multidisciplinary monitoring for pubertal development, fertility, gender identity, and gonadal complications is recommended.

Background: Excessive heat from household styling devices denatures α-keratin, damages the cuticle, and degrades overall hair quality. Conventional blow-dryer temperatures often exceed 90°C, surpassing the safety threshold for keratin fibers. To determine whether combining focused airflow with rapid thermal cycling (peak temperatures ≤60°C) attenuates multiscale hair damage compared with continuous-heat drying. Methods: Human-hair tresses were assigned either to a focused-flow dryer operating in alternating cool/warm cycles or to a continuous-heat mode. Jet characteristics were quantified using planar particle-image velocimetry, and airflow temperatures were recorded using micro-thermocouples. Post-treatment analyses included scanning electron microscopy (cuticular surface roughness, Ra), single-fiber tensile testing, crosssectional densitometry (fiber compactness), and confocal Raman spectroscopy (α-helix/disulfide bond integrity). Results: Thermal cycling with focused airflow increased the central-core flow fraction from 37% to 64% and confined hair-surface peaks to 58°C-60°C. Alternating hot-cold drying reduced cuticlar surface roughness by approximately 7.3%, whereas continuous hat air drying increased roughness by 4.9%. Ultimate tensile strength was essentially preserved (–0.4%) under cycling but fell by 9.4% with uninterrupted heat (p = 0.003).Compactness loss was limited to 33% vs. 50%, and the S-S disulfide bond (~510 cm –1 )/C-H bending vibration band (~720 cm –1 ) ratio decreased by only 11% (vs. 19% under continuous heat). Conclusion Brief cooling intervals, when paired with a confined airflow, effectively prevented α-keratindenaturation and structural collapse. These findings support a clinically relevant approach to preserving hairfiber integrity during routine hair care and styling.

Most rare diseases (orphan diseases) still lack approved treatment options despite major advances in research providing the necessary tools to understand their molecular basis and legislation providing regulatory and economic incentives to expedite the development of specific therapies. Addressing this translational gap is a multifaceted challenge, a key aspect of which is the selection of an optimal therapeutic modality to translate advances in rare disease knowledge to potential medicines known as orphan drugs. There are several strategies for developing orphan drugs for rare genetic disorders, including protein replacement therapies, small-molecule therapies (e.g., substrate reduction, chemical chaperone, cofactor, expression modification, and read-through therapies), monoclonal antibodies, antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNA or exon skipping therapies, gene replacement and direct genome-editing therapies, mRNA therapy, cell therapy, and drug repurposing. Each strategy has its own strengths and limitations in orphan drug development. Furthermore, numerous hurdles are present in clinical trials of rare genetic diseases because of difficulty with patient recruitment, unknown molecular physiology, the natural history of the disease, ethical concerns regarding pediatric patients, and regulatory challenges. To address these barriers, the rare genetic diseases community, including academic institutions, industry, patient advocacy groups, foundations, payers, and government regulatory and research organizations, must become engaged in discussions about these issues.

Most rare diseases (orphan diseases) still lack approved treatment options despite major advances in research providing the necessary tools to understand their molecular basis and legislation providing regulatory and economic incentives to expedite the development of specific therapies. Addressing this translational gap is a multifaceted challenge, a key aspect of which is the selection of an optimal therapeutic modality to translate advances in rare disease knowledge to potential medicines known as orphan drugs. There are several strategies for developing orphan drugs for rare genetic disorders, including protein replacement therapies, small-molecule therapies (e.g., substrate reduction, chemical chaperone, cofactor, expression modification, and read-through therapies), monoclonal antibodies, antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNA or exon skipping therapies, gene replacement and direct genome-editing therapies, mRNA therapy, cell therapy, and drug repurposing. Each strategy has its own strengths and limitations in orphan drug development. Furthermore, numerous hurdles are present in clinical trials of rare genetic diseases because of difficulty with patient recruitment, unknown molecular physiology, the natural history of the disease, ethical concerns regarding pediatric patients, and regulatory challenges. To address these barriers, the rare genetic diseases community, including academic institutions, industry, patient advocacy groups, foundations, payers, and government regulatory and research organizations, must become engaged in discussions about these issues.

Most rare diseases (orphan diseases) still lack approved treatment options despite major advances in research providing the necessary tools to understand their molecular basis and legislation providing regulatory and economic incentives to expedite the development of specific therapies. Addressing this translational gap is a multifaceted challenge, a key aspect of which is the selection of an optimal therapeutic modality to translate advances in rare disease knowledge to potential medicines known as orphan drugs. There are several strategies for developing orphan drugs for rare genetic disorders, including protein replacement therapies, small-molecule therapies (e.g., substrate reduction, chemical chaperone, cofactor, expression modification, and read-through therapies), monoclonal antibodies, antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNA or exon skipping therapies, gene replacement and direct genome-editing therapies, mRNA therapy, cell therapy, and drug repurposing. Each strategy has its own strengths and limitations in orphan drug development. Furthermore, numerous hurdles are present in clinical trials of rare genetic diseases because of difficulty with patient recruitment, unknown molecular physiology, the natural history of the disease, ethical concerns regarding pediatric patients, and regulatory challenges. To address these barriers, the rare genetic diseases community, including academic institutions, industry, patient advocacy groups, foundations, payers, and government regulatory and research organizations, must become engaged in discussions about these issues.

Most rare diseases (orphan diseases) still lack approved treatment options despite major advances in research providing the necessary tools to understand their molecular basis and legislation providing regulatory and economic incentives to expedite the development of specific therapies. Addressing this translational gap is a multifaceted challenge, a key aspect of which is the selection of an optimal therapeutic modality to translate advances in rare disease knowledge to potential medicines known as orphan drugs. There are several strategies for developing orphan drugs for rare genetic disorders, including protein replacement therapies, small-molecule therapies (e.g., substrate reduction, chemical chaperone, cofactor, expression modification, and read-through therapies), monoclonal antibodies, antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNA or exon skipping therapies, gene replacement and direct genome-editing therapies, mRNA therapy, cell therapy, and drug repurposing. Each strategy has its own strengths and limitations in orphan drug development. Furthermore, numerous hurdles are present in clinical trials of rare genetic diseases because of difficulty with patient recruitment, unknown molecular physiology, the natural history of the disease, ethical concerns regarding pediatric patients, and regulatory challenges. To address these barriers, the rare genetic diseases community, including academic institutions, industry, patient advocacy groups, foundations, payers, and government regulatory and research organizations, must become engaged in discussions about these issues.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

Background/Aims: Although guidelines exist regarding the evaluation and management of patients with chronic constipation (CC), little is known about real-world clinical practice patterns. This study aimed to evaluate the various practices used to manage CC patients in various clinical settings in South Korea. Methods: A nationwide web-based survey was conducted, randomly selecting gastroenterologists and non-gastroenterologists. The 25-item questionnaire included physicians’ perceptions and practices regarding the available options for diagnosing and managing CC patients in Korea. Results: The study participants comprised 193 physicians (86 gastroenterologists, 44.6%) involved in the clinical management of CC patients. The mean clinical experience was 12 years. Only 21 of 193 respondents (10.9%) used the Rome criteria when diagnosing CC. The Bristol Stool Form Scale was used by 29% of the respondents (56/193), while the digital rectal examination was performed by 11.9% of the respondents (23/193). Laboratory testing and colonoscopies were performed more frequently by gastroenterologists than by non-gastroenterologists (both p=0.001). Physiologic testing was used more frequently by gastroenterologists (p=0.046), phy-sicians at teaching hospitals, and physicians with clinical experience ≤10 years (both p<0.05). There were also significant differences in the preference for laxatives depending on the type of hospital. Conclusions There were discrepancies in the diagnosis and management of CC patients depending on the clinical setting. The utilization rates of the Bristol Stool Form Scale and digital rectal examination by physicians are low in real-world clinical practice. These results imply the need for better and more practical training of physicians in the assessment and management of CC.