Background: Long working hours have been associated with adverse physical and mental health outcomes; however, evidence regarding their relationship with satisfaction with work environment remains limited, particularly when long working hours are defined using a specific daily threshold. This study examined the association between working ≥10 hours per day and satisfaction with work environment among Korean wage workers, focusing on the cumulative number of such workdays per month. Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from the 7th Korean Working Conditions Survey. A total of 24,269 wage workers aged ≥18 years were included after excluding self-employed workers, unpaid family workers, shift workers, and respondents with missing data. Working ≥10 hours per day was categorized as 0, 1–9, and ≥10 days per month. Satisfaction with work environment was categorized as satisfied or dissatisfied. Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dissatisfaction with work environment according to the number of long working days, adjusting for demographic and occupational characteristics. Results: Compared with workers who did not work ≥10 hours per day, those who worked 1–9 days and ≥10 days per month showed progressively higher levels of dissatisfaction with work environment. After adjustment for demographic and occupational factors, the odds of dissatisfaction with work environment were significantly higher among workers who worked ≥10 hours per day for 1–9 days per month (OR: 1.380; 95% CI: 1.145–1.665) and ≥10 days per month (OR: 2.106; 95% CI: 1.627–2.725), demonstrating a dose–response relationship. Conclusions Among the analytic sample of Korean wage workers included in this study, working ≥10 hours per day was associated with greater dissatisfaction with work environment, with a dose–response pattern according to the number of long working days per month.

This case describes a male with a history of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) who had a concomitant branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm under long-term surveillance. During follow-up, new high-risk radiologic features developed within the pancreatic cyst, raising concern for malignant transformation and ultimately leading to surgical resection. However, final histopathologic examination revealed recurrent type 1 AIP rather than malignant progression of branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, a finding that represents an uncommon and diagnostically challenging manifestation. This case suggests that when new imaging changes are observed during surveillance of pancreatic cystic lesions, clinicians should consider not only malignant transformation but also the possibility of recurrence or coexistence of underlying diseases such as AIP.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes, identify complications, and analyze recurrence in patients undergoing surgery for primary retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs), which pose significant therapeutic challenges. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 59 patients who underwent surgery for primary RPTs at Ajou University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2024. Patients were divided into a multivisceral resection (MVR) group (n = 25) and a non-MVR group (n = 34) to compare demographics, clinical characteristics, pathological findings, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Compared to the non-MVR group, the MVR group had a significantly higher rate of open surgery (96.0% vs.73.5%, P = 0.034), longer operative times (237.6 minutes vs. 188.8 minutes, P = 0.032), more frequent R2 resections (32.0% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.018), and longer hospital stays (13.1 days vs. 7.0 days, P = 0.007). Malignant tumors comprised 67.7% of cases, with sarcoma being the most common. Recurrence rates were highest in well-differentiated liposarcoma (50.0%) and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (22.2%). While univariate analysis showed MVR was associated with severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III; odds ratio, 6.200; P = 0.029), this was not sustained as an independent predictor in multivariable analysis. Conclusion Although MVR was associated with severe complications in univariate analysis, it was not an independent predictor in multivariable analysis. This suggests the increased risk reflects overall surgical complexity. Therefore, MVR should be pursued when oncologically necessary, as it presents an acceptable morbidity profile.

Purpose: Radiotherapy is used to reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence after surgery, but it is a potential cause of secondary cancer. We validated the risk of secondary cancer in primary breast cancer who received radiotherapy compared with those who did not from a matched cohort using a large-scale observational study of the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) data network. Materials and Methods: A retrospective comparative cohort study using propensity score-matched cohorts was performed using two Observational Medical Outcome Partnership common data model databases, from tertiary general hospitals in South Korea. Among female patients who underwent surgery after the diagnosis of breast cancer, the risk of secondary primary malignant occurrence after 1:1 matching was analyzed. Results: Among 27,078 patients with breast cancer, there was no significant difference in the risk of secondary cancer following radiotherapy in 4,426 patients after 1:1 propensity-score matching. Further, there were no significant differences in the sensitivity analysis according to age, latency period, and number of radiation treatments. Conclusion There was no difference in the risk of secondary cancer in the patients diagnosed with breast cancer depending on whether or not radiotherapy was performed after surgery. In the future, it is necessary to analyze including data generated during cancer treatment.

It is difficult to determine a cause of bile duct stricture and dilatation. Eosinophilic cholangitis, a rare benign condition, may be one cause of bile duct stricture and dilatation. It can be evaluated using various methods of histopathology, radiographs, endoscopy, and hematologic findings. Treatment generally involves steroid therapy which can lead to improvement. This case report will discuss eosinophilic cholangitis, emphasizing that while it can easily be overlooked but should be considered in differential diagnoses.

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.

There is no established treatment for severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS). However, the potential role of tocilizumab (TCZ) in cytokine storm modulation warrants further investigation. In this study, we aimed to investigate the therapeutic potential of TCZ in adult patients with SFTS and provide valuable insights into the development of effective treatment strategies for this challenging infectious disease by assessing the impact of TCZ on cytokine dynamics and patient outcomes. This prospective longitudinal observational study included adult patients with SFTS at a teaching hospital in Korea between April 2013 and December 2023. Patients with SFTS and interleukin (IL)-6 levels ≥30 ng/mL received TCZ. The 14- and 28-day mortality rates were compared between the TCZ and therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) groups during the study period. Among the total of 97 patients, the clinical characteristics showed no significant differences between the TCZ (n=10) and TPE groups (n=30). Compared with TPE, TCZ treatment showed a trend towards lower mortality rate (14-day mortality rate: 10.0% vs. 16.7%, p=0.608; 28-day mortality rate:10.0% vs. 20.0%, p=0.480). Both treatments showed the potential to reduce the viral load and IL-6 levels, indicating their efficacy in managing the disease course. TCZ is a potential therapeutic option for SFTS as it modulates IL-6 levels and improves clinical outcomes.

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.