1.Comparison of Two Quinupristin–dalfopristin Susceptibility Testing Methods and Two Interpretive Criteria for Enterococcus faecium Bloodstream Isolates from Korean Hospitals
Yong Jun KWON ; Ha Jin LIM ; Soo Hyun KIM ; Seung A BYUN ; Ga Yeong LEE ; Ga-Gyeong KIM ; Seok Hoon JEONG ; Jeong Hwan SHIN ; Young Ah KIM ; Young UH ; Jong Hee SHIN
Annals of Laboratory Medicine 2025;45(6):630-634
Enterococcus faecium, particularly in its multidrug-resistant forms, causes invasive nosocomial infections. Given the limited data comparing the effectiveness of the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) and the CLSI clinical breakpoints (CBPs) for quinupristin–dalfopristin (QD) resistance and the need to evaluate their practical application, we retrospectively investigated the susceptibility patterns of 287 E.faecium bloodstream isolates from Korean hospitals to QD using the updated EUCAST and CLSI CBPs and two antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods: disk diffusion (DD) and Sensititre broth microdilution (Sensititre). QD resistance rates were 5.9% (CLSI) and 18.8% (EUCAST) for DD and 22.6% (CLSI) and 28.2% (EUCAST) for Sensititre. The most prevalent QD resistance gene types among QD-resistant isolates were ermB+msrC+ or ermB– msrC+. Categorical agreement between DD and Sensititre ranged from 77.7% to 90.7%, depending on the testing method and CBPs applied. The EUCAST zone diameter CBPs more effectively help identify QD-resistant E. faecium isolates using the DD method than the CLSI zone diameter CBPs. In comparison, the CLSI minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) CBPs provide more reliable results for resistance classification in the Sensititre method than EUCAST MIC CBPs. These findings would help improve clinical decision-making for treating multidrug-resistant E. faecium infections.
2.The KAPARD guidelines for atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents:Part II. Systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy
Hwan Soo KIM ; Eun LEE ; Kyunghoon KIM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Dong In SUH ; Yoon Ha HWANG ; Sungsu JUNG ; Minyoung JUNG ; Young A PARK ; Minji KIM ; In Suk SOL ; You Hoon JEON ; Sung-Il WOO ; Yong Ju LEE ; Jong Deok KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Gwang Cheon JANG ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2025;13(1):3-11
Atopic dermatitis is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease in children and adolescents. The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease published the Atopic Dermatitis Treatment Guideline in 2008, which has been helpful in atopic dermatitis treatment until now. Various reports on the development and effectiveness of new drugs have suggested that there is a need to develop and revise old treatment guidelines. Part 1 aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for skin care management and topical treatment for atopic dermatitis. Part 2 focuses on systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy. The goal of this guideline is intended to assist front-line doctors treating pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis patients make safer, more effective, and more rational decisions regarding systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy by providing evidence-based recommendations with a clear level of evidence and benefit regarding treatment.
3.The KAPARD guidelines for atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents:Part II. Systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy
Hwan Soo KIM ; Eun LEE ; Kyunghoon KIM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Dong In SUH ; Yoon Ha HWANG ; Sungsu JUNG ; Minyoung JUNG ; Young A PARK ; Minji KIM ; In Suk SOL ; You Hoon JEON ; Sung-Il WOO ; Yong Ju LEE ; Jong Deok KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Gwang Cheon JANG ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2025;13(1):3-11
Atopic dermatitis is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease in children and adolescents. The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease published the Atopic Dermatitis Treatment Guideline in 2008, which has been helpful in atopic dermatitis treatment until now. Various reports on the development and effectiveness of new drugs have suggested that there is a need to develop and revise old treatment guidelines. Part 1 aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for skin care management and topical treatment for atopic dermatitis. Part 2 focuses on systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy. The goal of this guideline is intended to assist front-line doctors treating pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis patients make safer, more effective, and more rational decisions regarding systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy by providing evidence-based recommendations with a clear level of evidence and benefit regarding treatment.
4.The KAPARD guidelines for atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents:Part II. Systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy
Hwan Soo KIM ; Eun LEE ; Kyunghoon KIM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Dong In SUH ; Yoon Ha HWANG ; Sungsu JUNG ; Minyoung JUNG ; Young A PARK ; Minji KIM ; In Suk SOL ; You Hoon JEON ; Sung-Il WOO ; Yong Ju LEE ; Jong Deok KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Gwang Cheon JANG ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2025;13(1):3-11
Atopic dermatitis is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease in children and adolescents. The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease published the Atopic Dermatitis Treatment Guideline in 2008, which has been helpful in atopic dermatitis treatment until now. Various reports on the development and effectiveness of new drugs have suggested that there is a need to develop and revise old treatment guidelines. Part 1 aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for skin care management and topical treatment for atopic dermatitis. Part 2 focuses on systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy. The goal of this guideline is intended to assist front-line doctors treating pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis patients make safer, more effective, and more rational decisions regarding systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy by providing evidence-based recommendations with a clear level of evidence and benefit regarding treatment.
5.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.
6.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.
7.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.
8.The KAPARD guidelines for atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents:Part II. Systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy
Hwan Soo KIM ; Eun LEE ; Kyunghoon KIM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Dong In SUH ; Yoon Ha HWANG ; Sungsu JUNG ; Minyoung JUNG ; Young A PARK ; Minji KIM ; In Suk SOL ; You Hoon JEON ; Sung-Il WOO ; Yong Ju LEE ; Jong Deok KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Gwang Cheon JANG ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2025;13(1):3-11
Atopic dermatitis is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease in children and adolescents. The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease published the Atopic Dermatitis Treatment Guideline in 2008, which has been helpful in atopic dermatitis treatment until now. Various reports on the development and effectiveness of new drugs have suggested that there is a need to develop and revise old treatment guidelines. Part 1 aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for skin care management and topical treatment for atopic dermatitis. Part 2 focuses on systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy. The goal of this guideline is intended to assist front-line doctors treating pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis patients make safer, more effective, and more rational decisions regarding systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy by providing evidence-based recommendations with a clear level of evidence and benefit regarding treatment.
9.The KAPARD guidelines for atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents:Part II. Systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy
Hwan Soo KIM ; Eun LEE ; Kyunghoon KIM ; Taek Ki MIN ; Dong In SUH ; Yoon Ha HWANG ; Sungsu JUNG ; Minyoung JUNG ; Young A PARK ; Minji KIM ; In Suk SOL ; You Hoon JEON ; Sung-Il WOO ; Yong Ju LEE ; Jong Deok KIM ; Hyeon-Jong YANG ; Gwang Cheon JANG ;
Allergy, Asthma & Respiratory Disease 2025;13(1):3-11
Atopic dermatitis is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease in children and adolescents. The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease published the Atopic Dermatitis Treatment Guideline in 2008, which has been helpful in atopic dermatitis treatment until now. Various reports on the development and effectiveness of new drugs have suggested that there is a need to develop and revise old treatment guidelines. Part 1 aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for skin care management and topical treatment for atopic dermatitis. Part 2 focuses on systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy. The goal of this guideline is intended to assist front-line doctors treating pediatric and adolescent atopic dermatitis patients make safer, more effective, and more rational decisions regarding systemic treatment, novel therapeutics, and adjuvant therapy by providing evidence-based recommendations with a clear level of evidence and benefit regarding treatment.
10.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.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail