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: Skipping breakfast is associated with an increased risk of chronic inflammatory diseases. This study aimed to examine the association between breakfast-eating habits and inflammation, using high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) as a marker. Methods: A total of 4,000 Korean adult males with no history of myocardial infarction, angina, stroke, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, or current smoking were included. Data from the 2016–2018 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used for analysis. The frequency of breakfast consumption was assessed through a questionnaire item in the dietary survey section asking participants about their weekly breakfast consumption routines over the past year. Participants were categorized into two groups, namely “0–2 breakfasts per week” and “3–7 breakfasts per week”; hs-CRP concentrations were measured through blood tests. Results: Comparing between the “infrequent breakfast consumption (0–2 breakfasts per week)” and “frequent breakfast consumption (3–7 breakfasts per week)” groups, the mean hs-CRP was found to be significantly higher in the “infrequent breakfast consumption” group, even after adjusting for age, body mass index, physical activity, alcohol consumption, systolic blood pressure, blood pressure medication, fasting blood glucose, and triglycerides (mean hs-CRP: frequent breakfast consumption, 1.36±0.09 mg/L; infrequent breakfast consumption, 1.17±0.05 mg/L; P-value=0.036). Conclusion Less frequent breakfast consumption was associated with elevated hs-CRP levels. Further large-scale studies incorporating adjusted measures of daily eating patterns as well as food quality and quantity are required for a deeper understanding of the role of breakfast in the primary prevention of chronic inflammatory diseases.

Objective: To analyze the microbiological and clinical characteristics of vulvovaginitis in girls, distinguishing between the premenarcheal and postmenarcheal groups in a tertiary center in South Korea. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 195 patients under 20 years of age diagnosed with vulvovaginitis at a tertiary hospital between 2014 and 2023. The patients were categorized into premenarcheal (n=95) and postmenarcheal (n=100) groups. Data on initial symptoms, microbial cultures, and treatment methods were analyzed. Results: The most common initial symptom was vaginal discharge, reported in 63.1% of cases. Culture results showed a 51.3% positivity rate for any microorganism, with a prevalence of gram-negative rods (32.8%) and gram-positive cocci (14.4%). The most frequently isolated microorganisms were Escherichia coli (17.9%), Candida albicans (7.7%), and Enterococcus faecalis (6.7%). Gram-negative rods were more common in the premenarcheal group (37.1% vs. 25.0%; p=0.01). No significant differences were observed in the prevalence of gram-positive cocci and Candida species between the two groups (16.8% vs. 12.0%, p=0.22; 6.3% vs. 13.0%, p=0.09; respectively). The susceptibilities of grampositive microorganisms to penicillin, oxacillin, clindamycin, vancomycin, and tetracycline were 58.8%, 58.3%, 94.7%, 100.0%, and 73.7%, respectively. The susceptibilities of gram-negative microorganisms to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and nitrofurantoin were 89.3%, 85.3%, 76.0%, and 100.0%, respectively. Conclusion This study identified differences in the microbial profiles associated with vulvovaginitis between premenarcheal and postmenarcheal girls. Age-specific and history-based clinical approaches tailored to menarcheal status are warranted to improve the management and outcomes of pediatric and adolescent vulvovaginitis.

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.

Objective: To analyze the microbiological and clinical characteristics of vulvovaginitis in girls, distinguishing between the premenarcheal and postmenarcheal groups in a tertiary center in South Korea. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 195 patients under 20 years of age diagnosed with vulvovaginitis at a tertiary hospital between 2014 and 2023. The patients were categorized into premenarcheal (n=95) and postmenarcheal (n=100) groups. Data on initial symptoms, microbial cultures, and treatment methods were analyzed. Results: The most common initial symptom was vaginal discharge, reported in 63.1% of cases. Culture results showed a 51.3% positivity rate for any microorganism, with a prevalence of gram-negative rods (32.8%) and gram-positive cocci (14.4%). The most frequently isolated microorganisms were Escherichia coli (17.9%), Candida albicans (7.7%), and Enterococcus faecalis (6.7%). Gram-negative rods were more common in the premenarcheal group (37.1% vs. 25.0%; p=0.01). No significant differences were observed in the prevalence of gram-positive cocci and Candida species between the two groups (16.8% vs. 12.0%, p=0.22; 6.3% vs. 13.0%, p=0.09; respectively). The susceptibilities of grampositive microorganisms to penicillin, oxacillin, clindamycin, vancomycin, and tetracycline were 58.8%, 58.3%, 94.7%, 100.0%, and 73.7%, respectively. The susceptibilities of gram-negative microorganisms to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and nitrofurantoin were 89.3%, 85.3%, 76.0%, and 100.0%, respectively. Conclusion This study identified differences in the microbial profiles associated with vulvovaginitis between premenarcheal and postmenarcheal girls. Age-specific and history-based clinical approaches tailored to menarcheal status are warranted to improve the management and outcomes of pediatric and adolescent vulvovaginitis.

Objective: To analyze the microbiological and clinical characteristics of vulvovaginitis in girls, distinguishing between the premenarcheal and postmenarcheal groups in a tertiary center in South Korea. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 195 patients under 20 years of age diagnosed with vulvovaginitis at a tertiary hospital between 2014 and 2023. The patients were categorized into premenarcheal (n=95) and postmenarcheal (n=100) groups. Data on initial symptoms, microbial cultures, and treatment methods were analyzed. Results: The most common initial symptom was vaginal discharge, reported in 63.1% of cases. Culture results showed a 51.3% positivity rate for any microorganism, with a prevalence of gram-negative rods (32.8%) and gram-positive cocci (14.4%). The most frequently isolated microorganisms were Escherichia coli (17.9%), Candida albicans (7.7%), and Enterococcus faecalis (6.7%). Gram-negative rods were more common in the premenarcheal group (37.1% vs. 25.0%; p=0.01). No significant differences were observed in the prevalence of gram-positive cocci and Candida species between the two groups (16.8% vs. 12.0%, p=0.22; 6.3% vs. 13.0%, p=0.09; respectively). The susceptibilities of grampositive microorganisms to penicillin, oxacillin, clindamycin, vancomycin, and tetracycline were 58.8%, 58.3%, 94.7%, 100.0%, and 73.7%, respectively. The susceptibilities of gram-negative microorganisms to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ciprofloxacin, ceftriaxone, and nitrofurantoin were 89.3%, 85.3%, 76.0%, and 100.0%, respectively. Conclusion This study identified differences in the microbial profiles associated with vulvovaginitis between premenarcheal and postmenarcheal girls. Age-specific and history-based clinical approaches tailored to menarcheal status are warranted to improve the management and outcomes of pediatric and adolescent vulvovaginitis.

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.

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: Skipping breakfast is associated with an increased risk of chronic inflammatory diseases. This study aimed to examine the association between breakfast-eating habits and inflammation, using high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) as a marker. Methods: A total of 4,000 Korean adult males with no history of myocardial infarction, angina, stroke, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer, or current smoking were included. Data from the 2016–2018 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used for analysis. The frequency of breakfast consumption was assessed through a questionnaire item in the dietary survey section asking participants about their weekly breakfast consumption routines over the past year. Participants were categorized into two groups, namely “0–2 breakfasts per week” and “3–7 breakfasts per week”; hs-CRP concentrations were measured through blood tests. Results: Comparing between the “infrequent breakfast consumption (0–2 breakfasts per week)” and “frequent breakfast consumption (3–7 breakfasts per week)” groups, the mean hs-CRP was found to be significantly higher in the “infrequent breakfast consumption” group, even after adjusting for age, body mass index, physical activity, alcohol consumption, systolic blood pressure, blood pressure medication, fasting blood glucose, and triglycerides (mean hs-CRP: frequent breakfast consumption, 1.36±0.09 mg/L; infrequent breakfast consumption, 1.17±0.05 mg/L; P-value=0.036). Conclusion Less frequent breakfast consumption was associated with elevated hs-CRP levels. Further large-scale studies incorporating adjusted measures of daily eating patterns as well as food quality and quantity are required for a deeper understanding of the role of breakfast in the primary prevention of chronic inflammatory diseases.