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: Respiratory infections play a major role in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). This study assessed the prevalence of bacterial and viral pathogens and their clinical impact on patients with AECOPD. Methods: This retrospective study included 1,186 patients diagnosed with AECOPD at 28 hospitals in South Korea between 2015 and 2018. We evaluated the identification rates of pathogens, basic patient characteristics, clinical features, and the factors associated with infections by potentially drug-resistant (PDR) pathogens using various microbiological tests. Results: Bacteria, viruses, and both were detected in 262 (22.1%), 265 (22.5%), and 129 (10.9%) of patients, respectively. The most common pathogens included Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17.8%), Mycoplasma pneumoniae (11.2%), Streptococcus pneumoniae (9.0%), influenza A virus (19.0%), rhinovirus (15.8%), and respiratory syncytial virus (6.4%). Notably, a history of pulmonary tuberculosis (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; p=0.046), bronchiectasis (OR, 1.99; p=0.032), and the use of a triple inhaler regimen within the past 6 months (OR, 2.04; p=0.005) were identified as significant factors associated with infection by PDR pathogens. Moreover, patients infected with PDR pathogens exhibited extended hospital stays (15.9 days vs. 12.4 days, p=0.018) and higher intensive care unit admission rates (15.9% vs. 9.5%, p=0.030). Conclusion This study demonstrates that a variety of pathogens are involved in episodes of AECOPD. Nevertheless, additional research is required to confirm their role in the onset and progression of AECOPD.

Background and Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been associated with an increased risk of cancer in various organs. OSA is also linked to chronic inflammation in the biliary tract and pancreas, a well-established risk factor for carcinogenesis in these organs. However, its relationship with biliary tract and pancreatic cancers remains unclear and has been rarely investigated. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether OSA serves as an independent risk factor for these malignancies by analyzing a nationwide healthcare claims database in South Korea. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service (KNHIS) database. Adults aged ≥20 years who were newly diagnosed with OSA (ICD-10: G47.30) between 2007 and 2014 were identified and propensity score-matched (1:5) with controls based on age, sex, and comorbidities. Individuals with pre-existing cancer diagnoses were excluded. The primary endpoints were the incidence of overall cancer, biliary tract cancer (C23–C24), and pancreatic cancer (C25). Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs), adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Results: A total of 1,191,444 individuals were included, comprising 198,574 patients diagnosed with OSA and 992,870 matched controls. OSA was associated with an increased overall cancer incidence (HR, 1.132; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.097–1.169); however, it was not significantly associated with pancreatic cancer (HR, 0.941; 95% CI, 0.823–1.072) or biliary tract cancer (HR, 0.931; 95% CI, 0.751–1.142). Subgroup analyses stratified by sex and age revealed no statistically significant associations across these groups. Conclusion Our findings do not support OSA as an independent risk factor for biliary tract or pancreatic cancers.

Background: and Purpose The National Brain Biobank of Korea (NBBK) is a brain bank consortium supported by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and the Korea National Institute of Health, and was launched in 2015 to support research into neurodegenerative disease dementia (NDD). This study aimed to introduce the NBBK and describes clinicopathological correlations based on analyses of data collected from the NBBK. Methods: Four hospital-based brain banks have been established in South Korea: Samsung Medical Center Brain Bank (SMCBB), Seoul National University Hospital Brain Bank (SNUHBB), Pusan National University Hospital Brain Bank (PNUHBB), and Myongji Hospital Brain Bank (MJHBB). Clinical and pathological data were collected from these brain banks using standardized protocols. The prevalence rates of clinical and pathological diagnoses were analyzed in order to characterize the clinicopathological correlations. Results: Between August 2016 and December 2023, 185 brain specimens were collected and pathologically evaluated (SNUHBB: 117; PNUHBB: 27; SMCBB: 34; MJHBB: 7). The age at consent was 70.8±12.6 years, and the age at autopsy was 71.7±12.4 years. The four-most-common clinical diagnoses were Alzheimer’s disease (AD) dementia (20.0%), idiopathic Parkinson’s disease (15.1%), unspecified dementia (11.9%), and cognitively unimpaired (CU) (11.4%).Most cases of unspecified dementia had a pathological diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) vasculopathy (31.8%) or AD (31.8%). Remarkably, only 14.2% of CU cases had normal pathological findings. The three-most-common pathological diagnoses were AD (26.5%), CNS vasculopathy (14.1%), and Lewy body disease (13.5%). Conclusions These clinical and neuropathological findings provide a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying NDD in South Korea.

Purpose: The revised Clinical Skills Test (CST) of the Korean Medical Licensing Exam aims to provide a better assessment of physicians’ clinical competence and ability to interact with patients. This study examined the impact of the revised CST on medical education curricula and resources nationwide, while also identifying areas for improvement within the revised CST. Methods: This study surveyed faculty responsible for clinical clerkships at 40 medical schools throughout Korea to evaluate the status and changes in clinical skills education, assessment, and resources related to the CST. The researchers distributed the survey via email through regional consortia between December 7, 2023 and January 19, 2024. Results: Nearly all schools implemented preliminary student–patient encounters during core clinical rotations. Schools primarily conducted clinical skills assessments in the third and fourth years, with a simplified form introduced in the first and second years. Remedial education was conducted through various methods, including one-on-one feedback from faculty after the assessment. All schools established clinical skills centers and made ongoing improvements. Faculty members did not perceive the CST revisions as significantly altering clinical clerkship or skills assessments. They suggested several improvements, including assessing patient records to improve accuracy and increasing the objectivity of standardized patient assessments to ensure fairness. Conclusion During the CST, students’ involvement in patient encounters and clinical skills education increased, improving the assessment and feedback processes for clinical skills within the curriculum. To enhance students’ clinical competencies and readiness, strengthening the validity and reliability of the CST is essential.