Background/Aims: Multiple myeloma (MM) predominantly affects elderly individuals, but studies on older patients with MM are limited. The clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with MM aged 80 years or over were retrospectively analyzed. Methods: This retrospective multicenter study was conducted to investigate the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of patients aged 80 years or over who were newly diagnosed with MM at five academic hospitals in Daegu, Korea, between 2010 and 2019. Results: A total of 127 patients with a median age of 83 years (range, 80–93 yr) were enrolled: 52 (40.9%) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) > 2, 84 (66.1%) with International Staging System (ISS) stage III disease, and 93 (73.2%) with a Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) > 4. Chemotherapy was administered to 86 patients (67.7%). The median overall survival was 9.3 months. Overall survival was significantly associated with ECOG PS > 2 (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.43–3.59), ISS stage III (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.18–3.34), and chemotherapy (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21–0.55). There was no statistically significant difference in event-free survival according to the type of anti-myeloma chemotherapy administered. The early mortality (EM) rate was 28.3%. Conclusions Even in patients with MM aged 80 years or over, chemotherapy can result in better survival outcomes than supportive care. Patients aged ≥ 80 years should not be excluded from chemotherapy based on age alone. However, reducing EM in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM remains challenging.

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.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, disabling, and functional bowel disorder that significantly affects social functioning and reduces quality of life and increases social costs. The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility published clinical practice guidelines on the management of IBS based on a systematic review of the literature in 2017, and planned to revise these guidelines in light of new evidence on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of IBS. The current revised version of the guidelines is consistent with the previous version and targets adults diagnosed with or suspected of having IBS. These guidelines were developed using a combination of de novo and adaptation methods, with analyses of existing guidelines and discussions within the committee, leading to the identification of key clinical questions. Finally, the guidelines consisted of 22 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and risk factors of IBS, 4 regarding diagnostic modalities and strategies, 2 regarding general management, and 13 regarding medical treatment. For each statement, the advantages, disadvantages, and precautions were thoroughly detailed. The modified Delphi method was used to achieve expert consensus to adopt the core recommendations of the guidelines. These guidelines serve as a reference for clinicians (including primary care physicians, general healthcare providers, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients, helping them to make informed decisions regarding IBS management.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

The Korean Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Committee within the Korean Society of Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition was established to develop ERAS guidelines tailored to the Korean context. This guideline focuses on creating the most current evidence-based practice guidelines for ERAS purposes, based on systematic reviews. All key questions targeted randomized controlled trials exclusively, and if fewer than 2 were available, studies employing propensity score matching were also included. Recommendations for each key question were marked with strength of recommendation and level of evidence following internal and external review processes by the committee.

Background/Aims: Multiple myeloma (MM) predominantly affects elderly individuals, but studies on older patients with MM are limited. The clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with MM aged 80 years or over were retrospectively analyzed. Methods: This retrospective multicenter study was conducted to investigate the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of patients aged 80 years or over who were newly diagnosed with MM at five academic hospitals in Daegu, Korea, between 2010 and 2019. Results: A total of 127 patients with a median age of 83 years (range, 80–93 yr) were enrolled: 52 (40.9%) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) > 2, 84 (66.1%) with International Staging System (ISS) stage III disease, and 93 (73.2%) with a Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) > 4. Chemotherapy was administered to 86 patients (67.7%). The median overall survival was 9.3 months. Overall survival was significantly associated with ECOG PS > 2 (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.43–3.59), ISS stage III (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.18–3.34), and chemotherapy (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21–0.55). There was no statistically significant difference in event-free survival according to the type of anti-myeloma chemotherapy administered. The early mortality (EM) rate was 28.3%. Conclusions Even in patients with MM aged 80 years or over, chemotherapy can result in better survival outcomes than supportive care. Patients aged ≥ 80 years should not be excluded from chemotherapy based on age alone. However, reducing EM in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM remains challenging.

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.