1.Comparison of Finasteride and Dutasteride on Risk of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Pooled Analysis of 15Real-world Databases
Dae Yul YANG ; Won-Woo SEO ; Rae Woong PARK ; Sang Youl RHEE ; Jae Myung CHA ; Yoon Soo HAH ; Chang Won JEONG ; Kyung-Jin KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Do Kyung KIM ; Ji Yong HA
The World Journal of Men's Health 2025;43(1):188-196
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.
2.Effects of hepatic fibrosis on the quantification of hepatic steatosis using the controlled attenuation parameter in patients with chronic hepatitis B
Hee Jun PARK ; Hyo Jeong KANG ; So Yeon KIM ; Seonghun YOON ; Seunghee BAEK ; In Hye SONG ; Hyeon Ji JANG ; Jong Keon JANG
Ultrasonography 2025;44(1):83-91
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.
3.Hepatocellular carcinoma in Korea: an analysis of the 2016-2018 Korean Nationwide Cancer Registry
Jihyun AN ; Young CHANG ; Gwang Hyeon CHOI ; Won SOHN ; Jeong Eun SONG ; Hyunjae SHIN ; Jae Hyun YOON ; Jun Sik YOON ; Hye Young JANG ; Eun Ju CHO ; Ji Won HAN ; Suk Kyun HONG ; Ju-Yeon CHO ; Kyu-Won JUNG ; Eun Hye PARK ; Eunyang KIM ; Bo Hyun KIM
Journal of Liver Cancer 2025;25(1):109-122
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.
5.Impact of single-port laparoscopic approach on scar assessment by patients and observers: a multicenter retrospective study
Sung Uk BAE ; Kyeong Eui KIM ; Chang-Woo KIM ; Ji-Hoon KIM ; Woon Kyung JEONG ; Yoon-Suk LEE ; Seong Kyu BAEK ; Suk-Hwan LEE ; Jun-Gi KIM
Annals of Coloproctology 2025;41(2):154-161
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.
Methods:
This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars.
Results:
No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient.
Conclusion
The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.
6.Impact of single-port laparoscopic approach on scar assessment by patients and observers: a multicenter retrospective study
Sung Uk BAE ; Kyeong Eui KIM ; Chang-Woo KIM ; Ji-Hoon KIM ; Woon Kyung JEONG ; Yoon-Suk LEE ; Seong Kyu BAEK ; Suk-Hwan LEE ; Jun-Gi KIM
Annals of Coloproctology 2025;41(2):154-161
Purpose:
This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.
Methods:
This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars.
Results:
No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient.
Conclusion
The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.
7.Impact of portal/superior mesenteric vein abutment angle on prognosis in pancreatic cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study
Hye Jeong JEONG ; DanHui HEO ; Soo Yeun LIM ; Hyeong Seok KIM ; Hochang CHAE ; So Jeong YOON ; Sang Hyun SHIN ; In Woong HAN ; Jin Seok HEO ; Ji Hye MIN ; Hongbeom KIM
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2025;108(4):231-239
Purpose:
Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis; however, the implementation of neoadjuvant treatment enables borderline resectable cases to undergo curative resection and improves the overall survival rate. Attempts have been made to expand the eligibility criteria for neoadjuvant treatment, even in resectable cases. Some studies have suggested a correlation between vein abutment and poor prognosis or that the abutment angle may affect prognosis. This study investigated the anatomical factors affecting the vessel abutment angle and its prognostic value in pancreatic cancer.
Methods:
Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery between 2012 and 2017 were included in this study. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. Data from only the intent-to-treat pancreaticoduodenectomy group were included in the analysis. Clinicopathological characteristics; preoperative factors such as CA 19-9, preoperative biliary drainage, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, portal vein/superior mesenteric vein contact angle measured via CT scan; and intraoperative factors were collected for analysis.
Results:
A total of 365 patients were included in this study, and the abutment group included 92 patients (25.2%). The abutment and no-contact groups did not show any significant differences in terms of the overall survival or diseasefree survival rate. Among the abutment groups, patients with less than 90° and 90°–180° did not show any significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, the only preoperative factor that had a prognostic effect was CA 19-9, a biological factor.
Conclusion
When there is no vessel invasion in the abutment group, upfront surgery should be considered because the angle does not affect the overall prognosis.
8.Resveratrol from Peanut Sprout Extract Promotes NK Cell Activation and Antitumor Activity
Hyunmin CHUNG ; Seong Ho BAK ; Eunju SHIN ; Taeho PARK ; Jinwoo KIM ; Hanseul JEONG ; Haiyoung JUNG ; Suk Ran YOON ; Ji-Yoon NOH
Biomolecules & Therapeutics 2025;33(2):355-364
Natural killer (NK) cells are innate immune cells that are crucial for anticancer activity and have been developed as an immune cell therapy for leukemia. However, their limited effectiveness against solid tumors has prompted research into methods to enhance NK cell activity through combination therapies. Health supplements capable of boosting immune surveillance against tumor cells are gaining attention owing to their potential benefits. Resveratrol, a stilbenoid produced by several plants including peanuts and grapes, reportedly exerts anticancer effects and can activate immune cells. The peanut sprout extract cultivated with fermented sawdust medium (PSEFS) is rich in resveratrol, leveraging its health benefits in terms of the dry weight of herbal products, thus maximizing the utilization of resveratrol’s beneficial properties. Our study compared the efficacy of resveratrol and PSEFS and revealed that PSEFS significantly enhanced NK cell activation compared with an equivalent dose of resveratrol. We investigated the ability of PSEFS to potentiate NK cell anticancer activity, focusing on NK cell survival, tumor cell lysis, and NK cell activation in PSEFS-administered mice. Our findings suggest that PSEFS could be a potential NK cell booster for cancer immunotherapy.
10.Erratum: Korean Gastric Cancer Association-Led Nationwide Survey on Surgically Treated Gastric Cancers in 2023
Dong Jin KIM ; Jeong Ho SONG ; Ji-Hyeon PARK ; Sojung KIM ; Sin Hye PARK ; Cheol Min SHIN ; Yoonjin KWAK ; Kyunghye BANG ; Chung-sik GONG ; Sung Eun OH ; Yoo Min KIM ; Young Suk PARK ; Jeesun KIM ; Ji Eun JUNG ; Mi Ran JUNG ; Bang Wool EOM ; Ki Bum PARK ; Jae Hun CHUNG ; Sang-Il LEE ; Young-Gil SON ; Dae Hoon KIM ; Sang Hyuk SEO ; Sejin LEE ; Won Jun SEO ; Dong Jin PARK ; Yoonhong KIM ; Jin-Jo KIM ; Ki Bum PARK ; In CHO ; Hye Seong AHN ; Sung Jin OH ; Ju-Hee LEE ; Hayemin LEE ; Seong Chan GONG ; Changin CHOI ; Ji-Ho PARK ; Eun Young KIM ; Chang Min LEE ; Jong Hyuk YUN ; Seung Jong OH ; Eunju LEE ; Seong-A JEONG ; Jung-Min BAE ; Jae-Seok MIN ; Hyun-dong CHAE ; Sung Gon KIM ; Daegeun PARK ; Dong Baek KANG ; Hogoon KIM ; Seung Soo LEE ; Sung Il CHOI ; Seong Ho HWANG ; Su-Mi KIM ; Moon Soo LEE ; Sang Hyun KIM ; Sang-Ho JEONG ; Yusung YANG ; Yonghae BAIK ; Sang Soo EOM ; Inho JEONG ; Yoon Ju JUNG ; Jong-Min PARK ; Jin Won LEE ; Jungjai PARK ; Ki Han KIM ; Kyung-Goo LEE ; Jeongyeon LEE ; Seongil OH ; Ji Hun PARK ; Jong Won KIM ;
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2025;25(2):400-402

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail