Background: With the aging population and advancements in medical care worldwide, the number of older patients with end-stage kidney disease continues to rise. This study aimed to identify factors associated with osteoporosis and osteopenia in older patients undergoing incident hemodialysis and assess their impact on mortality. Methods: We analyzed a large multicenter retrospective cohort of patients aged ≥70 years undergoing incident hemodialysis to identify factors associated with osteoporosis using logistic regression analysis and to assess the association of death with osteoporosis and osteopenia using Cox multivariable analysis. Results: Among 710 patients, 39.0% and 19.6% had osteoporosis and osteopenia, respectively. Osteoporosis was significantly associated with female sex, a history of fractures, and the absence of phosphate binder use. During a median follow-up of 36.8 months, 348 participants (58.8%) died. Mortality rates were the highest in the osteoporosis group (79.8%), followed by the osteopenia (77.2%) and normal bone mineral density (BMD) groups (35.2%). Cox regression analysis revealed that even after adjusting for covariates, the osteoporosis group was significantly associated with a higher mortality risk than the normal BMD group. Osteoporosis at the start of hemodialysis was significantly associated with higher mortality. Conclusion We should consider the importance of bone health in patients undergoing incident hemodialysis and pay attention to the use of phosphate binders and fracture prevention.

Background: Obesity is a well-known risk factor for chronic kidney disease and its progression. However, the impact of obesity on the renal function of the elderly population is uncertain. We investigated the association between obesity and renal outcomes in the elderly. Methods: We analyzed 130,504 participants from the Korean National Health Insurance Service-Senior cohort. Obesity was classified according to body mass index (BMI), sex-specific waist circumference (WC), and the presence of metabolic syndrome. The primary outcome was renal function decline, defined as a decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of at least 50% from baseline or new-onset end-stage renal disease. Results: During a follow-up period of 559,531.1 person-years (median, 4.3 years), 2,486 participants (19.0%; incidence rate of 4.44 per 1,000 person-years) showed renal function decline. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model revealed that BMI/WC was not associated with renal function decline. However, the group with metabolic syndrome had a significantly increased risk of renal function decline compared to the group without metabolic syndrome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13–1.36). Compared with the non-metabolic syndrome group, the adjusted HRs (95% CI) for participants with one through five components were 0.96 (0.84–1.11), 1.10 (0.96–1.27), 1.24 (1.06–1.45), 1.37 (1.12–1.66), and 1.99 (1.42–2.79), respectively (p for trend < 0.001). Conclusion In elderly Korean adults, metabolic syndrome and the number of its components were associated with a higher risk of renal function decline, but BMI or WC was not significant.

Objective: Suicide is a leading cause of death among adolescents, and despite the need to distinguish between suicidal consideration and suicide attempts, research focused on suicide attempts remains insufficient. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the influence of self-perceived weight on suicide attempts. Methods: This study utilized data from the Korea Youth Risk Behavior Web-based Survey for its analysis from 2005 to 2023, including a total of 1,156,728 participants. This study utilized various analytical methods to examine the influence of self-perceived weight on suicide attempts. We estimated weighted prevalence and used linear regression to assess temporal trend β coefficients and their differences (βdiff) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and survey-weighted logistic regression to estimate weighted odds ratios (wORs) and 95% CIs for the association between self-perceived weight and suicide attempts. Results: A comparison of suicide attempts based on self-perceived weight suggested that individuals who perceived themselves as overweight (weighted prevalence, 3.97% [95% CI, 3.89 to 4.04]) had the highest rate of suicide attempts, followed by those who perceived themselves as underweight (3.36% [95% CI, 3.28 to 3.44]), while those who perceived themselves as having a normal weight (3.20% [95% CI, 3.14 to 3.27]) had the lowest rate. Additionally, females (underweight: 4.47% [95% CI, 4.32 to 4.62]; normal weight: 3.91% [95% CI, 3.81 to 4.01]; overweight: 5.23% [5.11 to 5.35]) experienced more suicide attempts than males (underweight: 2.73% [95% CI, 2.65 to 2.82]; normal weight: 2.43% [95% CI, 2.35 to 2.51]; overweight: 2.60% [95% CI, 2.52 to 2.69]). Conclusion Findings from the present study suggest that self-perceived weight was associated with suicide attempts and interaction analyses indicated a potential sex-based difference in the impact of body image distortion. Therefore, this study suggests the introduction of programs and campaigns aimed at correcting distorted self-perceived weight.

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: and Purpose This study evaluated the diagnostic utility of an anti-signal-recognition particle 54 (anti-SRP54) antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) as well as the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of patients with SRP immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM). Methods: We evaluated 87 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy and 107 healthy participants between January 2002 and December 2023. The sensitivity and specificity of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies were assessed, and the clinical profiles of patients with antiSRP54 antibodies were determined. Results: The ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies had a sensitivity and specificity of 88% and 99%, respectively, along with a test–retest reliability of 0.92 (p<0.001). The 32 patients diagnosed with anti-SRP IMNM using a line-blot immunoassay included 28 (88%) who tested positive for anti-SRP54 antibodies using the ELISA, comprising 12 (43%) males and 16 (57%) females whose median ages at symptom onset and diagnosis were 43.0 years and 43.5 years, respectively. Symptoms included proximal muscle weakness in all 28 (100%) patients, neck weakness in 9 (32%), myalgia in 15 (54%), dysphagia in 5 (18%), dyspnea in 4 (14%), dysarthria in 2 (7%), interstitial lung disease in 2 (7%), and myocarditis in 2 (7%). The median serum creatine kinase (CK) level was 7,261 U/L (interquartile range: 5,086–10,007 U/L), and the median anti-SRP54 antibody level was 2.0 U/mL (interquartile range: 1.0–5.6 U/mL). The serum CK level was significantly higher in patients with coexisting anti-Ro-52 antibodies. Conclusions This study has confirmed the reliability of the ELISA for anti-SRP54 antibodies and provided insights into the clinical, serological, and pathological characteristics of South Korean patients with anti-SRP IMNM.

Background: This study focuses on the development of a hydrogel wound patch incorporating natural extracts, designed to function as a sun patch. By maintaining a moist environment and delivering bioactive compounds, the patch promotes wound healing while also providing cooling and ultraviolet (UV) protection. This dual-purpose approach enhances skin recovery and shields damaged areas from external stressors. The study aims to optimize the formulation and evaluate its efficacy for both therapeutic and cosmetic applications. Methods: Hydrogel solutions prepared using acrylamide, glycerol, and carboxymethyl cellulose were enriched with extracts from Saururus chinensis, Styrax japonicus, and Centella asiatica. The enriched solutions were processed into patches and tested for their adhesion, cooling effects, and UV protective abilities. Additionally, the wound healing efficacy was evaluated in a mouse model. Results: The hydrogel patches demonstrated comparable adhesion properties, effective skin cooling, and high UV protection rates similar to those of commercially available products. In the mouse model, the patches significantly improved wound closure and tissue regeneration in the experimental group as compared to the control group. Conclusion The study confirms that hydrogel sun patches enriched with natural extracts have the ability to effectively promote wound healing and offer substantial UV protection and cooling benefits, demonstrating their potential medical and cosmetic applications.

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.

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.