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 assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

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 assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

Background: s/Aims: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in South Korea. This study evaluated the characteristics of Korean patients newly diagnosed with HCC in 2016-2018. Methods: Data from the Korean Primary Liver Cancer Registry (KPLCR), a representative database of patients newly diagnosed with HCC in South Korea, were analyzed. This study investigated 4,462 patients with HCC registered in the KPLCR in 2016-2018. Results: The median patient age was 63 years (interquartile range, 55-72). 79.7% of patients were male. Hepatitis B infection was the most common underlying liver disease (54.5%). The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system classified patients as follows: stage 0 (14.9%), A (28.8%), B (7.5%), C (39.0%), and D (9.8%). The median overall survival was 3.72 years (95% confidence interval, 3.47-4.14), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates of 71.3%, 54.1%, and 44.3%, respectively. In 2016-2018, there was a significant shift toward BCLC stage 0-A and Child-Turcotte-Pugh liver function class A (P<0.05), although survival rates did not differ by diagnosis year. In the treatment group (n=4,389), the most common initial treatments were transarterial therapy (31.7%), surgical resection (24.9%), best supportive care (18.9%), and local ablation therapy (10.5%). Conclusions Between 2016 and 2018, HCC tended to be diagnosed at earlier stages, with better liver function in later years. However, since approximately half of the patients remained diagnosed at an advanced stage, more rigorous and optimized HCC screening strategies should be implemented.

Purpose: This multicenter, open-label, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in previously treated patients across 14 institutions in South Korea. Materials and Methods: Between September 2017 and July 2020, 29 patients with histologically confirmed CTCL received treatment, consisting of eight 4-week cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance therapy, contingent upon response, for up to one year. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective global response. Results: Thirteen of the 29 patients (44.8%) achieved an objective global response, including two complete responses. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months, with responders showing a median PFS of 14.0 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy and hematologic toxicities. Despite the trend toward shorter PFS in patients with higher mutation burdens, genomic profiling before and after treatment showed no significant emergence of new mutations indicative of disease progression. Conclusion This study supports the use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a viable and safe treatment option for previously treated CTCL, demonstrating substantial efficacy and manageability in adverse effects. Further research with a larger cohort is suggested to validate these findings and explore the prognostic value of mutation profiles.

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 assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.

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 assessed the impact of hepatic fibrosis on the diagnostic performance of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: CHB patients who underwent liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and CAP assessment using transient elastography before liver resection between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical data included body mass index (BMI) and laboratory parameters. The histologically determined hepatic fat fraction (HFF) and fibrosis stages were reviewed by pathologists blinded to clinical and radiologic data. The Pearson correlation coefficient between CAP and HFF was calculated. The diagnostic performance of CAP for significant hepatic steatosis (HFF ≥10%) was assessed using areas under the receiver operating curve (AUCs), stratified by fibrosis stages (F0-1 vs. F2-4). Factors significantly associated with CAP were determined by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. Results: Among 399 CHB patients (median age 59 years; 306 men), 16.3% showed significant steatosis. HFF ranged from 0% to 60%. Of these patients, 9.8%, 19.8%, 29.3%, and 41.1% had fibrosis stages F0-1, F2, F3, and F4, respectively. CAP positively correlated with HFF (r=0.445, P<0.001). The AUC of CAP for diagnosing significant steatosis was 0.786 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.726 to 0.845) overall, and significantly lower in F2-4 (0.772; 95% CI, 0.708 to 0.836) than in F0-1 (0.924; 95% CI, 0.835 to 1.000) (P=0.006). Multivariable analysis showed that BMI (P<0.001) and HFF (P<0.001) significantly affected CAP, whereas LSM and fibrosis stages did not. Conclusion CAP evaluations of significant hepatic steatosis are less reliable in CHB patients with significant or more advanced (F2-4) than with no or mild (F0-1) fibrosis.