Purpose: Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is recommended for muscle-invasive or lymph node-positive upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). However, disease recurrences are frequently observed in pT1 disease, and AC may increase the risk of overtreatment in pT2 UTUC patients. This study aimed to validate a risk-adapted scoring model for selecting UTUC patients with ≤pT2 disease who would benefit from AC. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 443 ≤pT2 UTUC patients who underwent RNU. A risk-adapted scoring model was applied, categorizing patients into low- or high-risk groups. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were analyzed according to risk group. Results: Overall, 355 patients (80.1%) and 88 patients (19.9%) were categorized into the low- and high-risk groups, respectively, with the latter having higher pathological stages, concurrent carcinoma in situ, and synchronous bladder tumors. Disease recurrence occurred in 45 patients (10.2%), among whom 19 (5.4%) and 26 (29.5%) belonged to the low- and high-risk groups, respectively (p<0.001). High-risk patients had significantly shorter RFS (64.3% vs. 93.6% at 60 months; hazard ratio [HR] 13.66; p<0.001) and worse CSS (80.7% vs. 91.5% at 60 months; HR 4.25; p=0.002). Multivariate analysis confirmed that pT2 stage and the high-risk group were independent predictors of recurrence and cancer-specific death (p<0.001). Decision curve analysis for RFS showed larger net benefits with our model than with the T stage model. Conclusions The risk-adapted scoring model effectively predicts recurrence and identifies optimal candidates for AC post RNU in non-metastatic UTUC.

Background and Objectives: Hearing loss significantly affects communication, psychosocial well-being, and quality of life. This study analyzes the National Health Insurance Service database to assess the trends and characteristics of hearing loss in South Korea from 2010 to 2020.Subjects and Method The database encompasses 97% of the Korean population, providing comprehensive data on medical history, prescriptions, and health examinations. The analysis used the World Health Organization’s ICD-10 definitions to categorize hearing loss types and examine their prevalence and incidence across various demographics over 11 years. Results: There was an overall annual increase of 4.62% in diagnosed cases of hearing loss, with the most significant rise among the elderly. The rate of increase accelerated from 3.32% between 2010 and 2014 to 6.49% between 2014 and 2020, corresponding with the improved hearing aid access facilitated by policy changes. Women showed a slightly higher increase than men. The data also indicated a consistent rise in abnormal hearing test results during health examinations, especially in older adults. Conclusion The study highlights an increasing trend in hearing loss diagnoses, driven by an aging population and enhanced detection facilitated by policy changes. These findings emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and targeted health policies to manage hearing loss effectively, offering valuable insights for global health management and policy development.

Background and Objectives: This study aims to analyze trends in hearing disability and the use of hearing rehabilitation devices (hearing aids and cochlear implants) in South Korea over the past 11 years (2010-2020) using data from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS).Subjects and Method Data were extracted from the NHIS database, covering approximately 97% of the South Korean population. Patients diagnosed with hearing loss were classified using ICD-10 codes. The data were analyzed to determine trends in hearing disability, hearing aid prescriptions, and cochlear implant usage by age, gender, and types and causes of hearing loss. Results: The number of hearing disability patients increased from 170900 in 2010 to 362738 in 2020, with an annual growth rate of 7.95%. The highest increase was observed in the ≥60 age group, with an annual growth rate of 11.04%. Hearing aid prescriptions rose from 4966 in 2010 to 11974 in 2020, showing a 10.45% annual increase. Females showed a higher growth rate in both hearing disability and hearing aid prescriptions compared to males. Cochlear implant prescriptions also increased, particularly among older adults. Conclusion The study highlights a significant rise in hearing disability and the use of hearing aids and cochlear implants in South Korea, especially among the elderly. The findings underscore the importance of early diagnosis and intervention for hearing loss and the need for policy improvements to enhance accessibility and affordability of hearing rehabilitation services. Additional strategies are needed to ensure appropriate hearing rehabilitation for those not yet receiving adequate care.

Background and Objectives: Hearing loss significantly affects communication, psychosocial well-being, and quality of life. This study analyzes the National Health Insurance Service database to assess the trends and characteristics of hearing loss in South Korea from 2010 to 2020.Subjects and Method The database encompasses 97% of the Korean population, providing comprehensive data on medical history, prescriptions, and health examinations. The analysis used the World Health Organization’s ICD-10 definitions to categorize hearing loss types and examine their prevalence and incidence across various demographics over 11 years. Results: There was an overall annual increase of 4.62% in diagnosed cases of hearing loss, with the most significant rise among the elderly. The rate of increase accelerated from 3.32% between 2010 and 2014 to 6.49% between 2014 and 2020, corresponding with the improved hearing aid access facilitated by policy changes. Women showed a slightly higher increase than men. The data also indicated a consistent rise in abnormal hearing test results during health examinations, especially in older adults. Conclusion The study highlights an increasing trend in hearing loss diagnoses, driven by an aging population and enhanced detection facilitated by policy changes. These findings emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and targeted health policies to manage hearing loss effectively, offering valuable insights for global health management and policy development.

Background and Objectives: This study aims to analyze trends in hearing disability and the use of hearing rehabilitation devices (hearing aids and cochlear implants) in South Korea over the past 11 years (2010-2020) using data from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS).Subjects and Method Data were extracted from the NHIS database, covering approximately 97% of the South Korean population. Patients diagnosed with hearing loss were classified using ICD-10 codes. The data were analyzed to determine trends in hearing disability, hearing aid prescriptions, and cochlear implant usage by age, gender, and types and causes of hearing loss. Results: The number of hearing disability patients increased from 170900 in 2010 to 362738 in 2020, with an annual growth rate of 7.95%. The highest increase was observed in the ≥60 age group, with an annual growth rate of 11.04%. Hearing aid prescriptions rose from 4966 in 2010 to 11974 in 2020, showing a 10.45% annual increase. Females showed a higher growth rate in both hearing disability and hearing aid prescriptions compared to males. Cochlear implant prescriptions also increased, particularly among older adults. Conclusion The study highlights a significant rise in hearing disability and the use of hearing aids and cochlear implants in South Korea, especially among the elderly. The findings underscore the importance of early diagnosis and intervention for hearing loss and the need for policy improvements to enhance accessibility and affordability of hearing rehabilitation services. Additional strategies are needed to ensure appropriate hearing rehabilitation for those not yet receiving adequate care.

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: Hearing loss significantly affects communication, psychosocial well-being, and quality of life. This study analyzes the National Health Insurance Service database to assess the trends and characteristics of hearing loss in South Korea from 2010 to 2020.Subjects and Method The database encompasses 97% of the Korean population, providing comprehensive data on medical history, prescriptions, and health examinations. The analysis used the World Health Organization’s ICD-10 definitions to categorize hearing loss types and examine their prevalence and incidence across various demographics over 11 years. Results: There was an overall annual increase of 4.62% in diagnosed cases of hearing loss, with the most significant rise among the elderly. The rate of increase accelerated from 3.32% between 2010 and 2014 to 6.49% between 2014 and 2020, corresponding with the improved hearing aid access facilitated by policy changes. Women showed a slightly higher increase than men. The data also indicated a consistent rise in abnormal hearing test results during health examinations, especially in older adults. Conclusion The study highlights an increasing trend in hearing loss diagnoses, driven by an aging population and enhanced detection facilitated by policy changes. These findings emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and targeted health policies to manage hearing loss effectively, offering valuable insights for global health management and policy development.

Background and Objectives: This study aims to analyze trends in hearing disability and the use of hearing rehabilitation devices (hearing aids and cochlear implants) in South Korea over the past 11 years (2010-2020) using data from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS).Subjects and Method Data were extracted from the NHIS database, covering approximately 97% of the South Korean population. Patients diagnosed with hearing loss were classified using ICD-10 codes. The data were analyzed to determine trends in hearing disability, hearing aid prescriptions, and cochlear implant usage by age, gender, and types and causes of hearing loss. Results: The number of hearing disability patients increased from 170900 in 2010 to 362738 in 2020, with an annual growth rate of 7.95%. The highest increase was observed in the ≥60 age group, with an annual growth rate of 11.04%. Hearing aid prescriptions rose from 4966 in 2010 to 11974 in 2020, showing a 10.45% annual increase. Females showed a higher growth rate in both hearing disability and hearing aid prescriptions compared to males. Cochlear implant prescriptions also increased, particularly among older adults. Conclusion The study highlights a significant rise in hearing disability and the use of hearing aids and cochlear implants in South Korea, especially among the elderly. The findings underscore the importance of early diagnosis and intervention for hearing loss and the need for policy improvements to enhance accessibility and affordability of hearing rehabilitation services. Additional strategies are needed to ensure appropriate hearing rehabilitation for those not yet receiving adequate care.

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.