Background: Although the presence of both obesity and reduced muscle mass presents a dual metabolic burden and additively has a negative effect on a variety of cardiometabolic parameters, data regarding the associations between their combined effects and left ventricular diastolic function are limited. This study investigated the association between the ratio of skeletal muscle mass to visceral fat area (SVR) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in patients with preserved ejection fraction using random forest machine learning. Methods: In total, 1,070 participants with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction who underwent comprehensive health examinations, including transthoracic echocardiography and bioimpedance body composition analysis, were enrolled. SVR was calculated as an index of sarcopenic obesity by dividing the appendicular skeletal muscle mass by the visceral fat area. Results: In the random forest model, age and SVR were the most powerful predictors of LVDD. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that older age (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.15) and lower SVR (adjusted OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.57) were independent risk factors for LVDD.SVR showed a significant improvement in predictive performance and fair predictability for LVDD, with the highest area under the curve noted in both men and women, with statistical significance. In non-obese and metabolically healthy individuals, the lowest SVR tertile was associated with a greater risk of LVDD compared to the highest SVR tertile. Conclusion Decreased muscle mass and increased visceral fat were significantly associated with LVDD compared to obesity, body fat composition, and body muscle composition indices.

Background: Although the presence of both obesity and reduced muscle mass presents a dual metabolic burden and additively has a negative effect on a variety of cardiometabolic parameters, data regarding the associations between their combined effects and left ventricular diastolic function are limited. This study investigated the association between the ratio of skeletal muscle mass to visceral fat area (SVR) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in patients with preserved ejection fraction using random forest machine learning. Methods: In total, 1,070 participants with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction who underwent comprehensive health examinations, including transthoracic echocardiography and bioimpedance body composition analysis, were enrolled. SVR was calculated as an index of sarcopenic obesity by dividing the appendicular skeletal muscle mass by the visceral fat area. Results: In the random forest model, age and SVR were the most powerful predictors of LVDD. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that older age (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.15) and lower SVR (adjusted OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.57) were independent risk factors for LVDD.SVR showed a significant improvement in predictive performance and fair predictability for LVDD, with the highest area under the curve noted in both men and women, with statistical significance. In non-obese and metabolically healthy individuals, the lowest SVR tertile was associated with a greater risk of LVDD compared to the highest SVR tertile. Conclusion Decreased muscle mass and increased visceral fat were significantly associated with LVDD compared to obesity, body fat composition, and body muscle composition indices.

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: Although the presence of both obesity and reduced muscle mass presents a dual metabolic burden and additively has a negative effect on a variety of cardiometabolic parameters, data regarding the associations between their combined effects and left ventricular diastolic function are limited. This study investigated the association between the ratio of skeletal muscle mass to visceral fat area (SVR) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in patients with preserved ejection fraction using random forest machine learning. Methods: In total, 1,070 participants with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction who underwent comprehensive health examinations, including transthoracic echocardiography and bioimpedance body composition analysis, were enrolled. SVR was calculated as an index of sarcopenic obesity by dividing the appendicular skeletal muscle mass by the visceral fat area. Results: In the random forest model, age and SVR were the most powerful predictors of LVDD. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that older age (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.15) and lower SVR (adjusted OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.57) were independent risk factors for LVDD.SVR showed a significant improvement in predictive performance and fair predictability for LVDD, with the highest area under the curve noted in both men and women, with statistical significance. In non-obese and metabolically healthy individuals, the lowest SVR tertile was associated with a greater risk of LVDD compared to the highest SVR tertile. Conclusion Decreased muscle mass and increased visceral fat were significantly associated with LVDD compared to obesity, body fat composition, and body muscle composition indices.

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.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the incidence, risk factors, and clinical course of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) following pancreaticoduodenectomy, focusing on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy and other metabolic changes. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 189 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between 2013 and 2016. NAFLD was diagnosed using computed tomography (CT) imaging, defined as a liver-tospleen attenuation ratio <0.9. Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity were assessed using preoperative CT scans. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for NAFLD development. Results: The cumulative incidence of NAFLD increased over time, with rates of 15.9% at one year, 20.4% at three years, and 35.2% at five years post-pancreaticoduodenectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was identified as the only significant independent predictor of NAFLD development (odds ratio, 2.74; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-6.70; P=0.023). No significant associations were found between NAFLD and pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT), sarcopenia, or sarcopenic obesity. Serial analysis of NAFLD status in long-term survivors revealed dynamic changes, with some patients experiencing spontaneous remission or recurrence. Conclusion NAFLD is a common, progressive complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy, particularly in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Although no significant associations with PERT or sarcopenia were observed, these areas warrant further investigation. Long-term monitoring and targeted management strategies are recommended to address NAFLD in this population. Future prospective studies are needed to elucidate the natural history and contributing factors of NAFLD after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Purpose: This report offers a detailed examination of the inception and current state of the Heavy-ion Therapy Center (HITC) at the Yonsei Cancer Center (YCC), setting it apart as the world’s first center equipped with a fixed beam and two superconducting gantries for carbon-ion radiation therapy (CIRT). Materials and Methods: Preparations for CIRT at YCC began in 2013; accordingly, this center has completed a decade of meticulous planning and culminating since the operational commencement of the HITC in April 2023. Results: This report elaborates on the clinical preparation for adopting CIRT in Korea. It includes an extensive description of HITC’s facility layout at YCC, which comprises the accelerator and treatment rooms. Furthermore, this report delineates the clinical workflow, criteria for CIRT application, and the rigorous quality assurance processes implemented at YCC. It highlights YCC’s sophisticated radiation therapy infrastructure, collaborative initiatives, and the efficacious treatment of >200 prostate cancer cases utilizing CIRT. Conclusion This manuscript concludes by discussing the prospective influence of CIRT on the medical domain within Korea, spotlighting YCC’s pioneering contribution and forecasting the widespread integration of this groundbreaking technology.