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: This study assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in South Korea. This study evaluated the characteristics of Korean patients newly diagnosed with HCC in 2016-2018. Methods: Data from the Korean Primary Liver Cancer Registry (KPLCR), a representative database of patients newly diagnosed with HCC in South Korea, were analyzed. This study investigated 4,462 patients with HCC registered in the KPLCR in 2016-2018. Results: The median patient age was 63 years (interquartile range, 55-72). 79.7% of patients were male. Hepatitis B infection was the most common underlying liver disease (54.5%). The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system classified patients as follows: stage 0 (14.9%), A (28.8%), B (7.5%), C (39.0%), and D (9.8%). The median overall survival was 3.72 years (95% confidence interval, 3.47-4.14), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates of 71.3%, 54.1%, and 44.3%, respectively. In 2016-2018, there was a significant shift toward BCLC stage 0-A and Child-Turcotte-Pugh liver function class A (P<0.05), although survival rates did not differ by diagnosis year. In the treatment group (n=4,389), the most common initial treatments were transarterial therapy (31.7%), surgical resection (24.9%), best supportive care (18.9%), and local ablation therapy (10.5%). Conclusions Between 2016 and 2018, HCC tended to be diagnosed at earlier stages, with better liver function in later years. However, since approximately half of the patients remained diagnosed at an advanced stage, more rigorous and optimized HCC screening strategies should be implemented.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

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: This study assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

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: This study assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

Purpose: To investigate the clinical efficacy of rebamipide eyedrops in patients with meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) associated with Sjögren’s syndrome. Methods: The study included 50 patients with Sjögren’s syndrome accompanied by MGD treated with 0.05% (w/v) cyclosporine and 0.15% (w/v) sodium hyaluronate eyedrops. They were divided into two groups: 25 who added rebamipide eyedrops to their existing treatments and a control group of 25 whose treatments did not change. We evaluated the tear breakup time, the Schirmer test and conjunctival staining scores, meibomian gland quality and function, and eyelid margin irregularity before prescribing rebamipide eyedrops and 1 and 3 months after prescription. Additionally, before eyedrops use and 3 months later, meibographic scores were assessed via imaging of the meibomian gland and ocular surface disease index values also were assessed. Results: The rebamipide group exhibited significant improvements in the tear breakup time, conjunctival staining score, and ocular surface disease index compared to before treatment (all p < 0.05). However, the Schirmer test result, meibomian gland quality and function, and eyelid margin irregularity did not differ between either groups before or after treatment. After 3 months of eyedrop use, the rebamipide group exhibited a significantly higher tear breakup time (p < 0.01) and Schirmer test score (p < 0.01) than the control group (p = 0.01), and significantly lower ocular surface disease index and conjunctival staining scores (p < 0.01). Conclusions Addition of rebamipide eyedrops to the conventional treatment of patients with Sjögren’s syndrome accompanied by MGD effectively improves dry eye symptoms and the ocular surface parameters.

Purpose: This study examined the status of arthroscopic shoulder surgery in ambulatory settings by analyzing a single institutional database. Materials and Methods: Three hundred and eight arthroscopic shoulder surgeries performed between June 2022 and March 2023 were reviewed retrospectively. Propensity score matching (1-to-2) was performed between the day surgery group and the inpatient group according to sex, age, tear size, and interscalene nerve block (ISNB). Finally, 59 patients in the day surgery group and 118 patients in the inpatient group were matched. The indications of the day surgery were pre-determined according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I or II, and the patient's social, medical, and surgical factors were thoroughly analyzed to define the target group of the day surgery. Complications related to voiding difficulty were prevented by classifying the patients using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) before surgery, and preventive medications were prescribed in the higher-risk patients with an IPSS of more than 7. To reduce postoperative pain, ISNB and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) were applied to all patients during the study period, while day surgery patients received an additional bolus injection (5 cc of 0.375% ropivacaine+5 cc of normal saline) before discharge instead of continuous ISNB PCA. This study compared the postoperative pain assessments at discharge and on postoperative days 1, 2, and 14, as well as the total volume of saline irrigation, surgical time, and complications between the day surgery and inpatient groups. Results: The visual analogue scale for pain (pVAS) at the time of surgery were comparable in the day surgery group (4.1±1.5) and inpatient surgery group (4.1±1.1), with no significant difference between them (p=0.35). Similarly, the postoperative pVAS at 1, 2, and 14 days postoperatively was similar in the two groups (all p>0.05). The surgical-related factors, such as the total volume of saline irrigation and surgical time, were similar in the two groups. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups (all p>0.05). Conclusion These results show that arthroscopic shoulder surgery in ambulatory settings is a safe alternative to inpatient surgery.