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.

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: 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.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy (CIRT) offers superior dose distributions and greater biological effectiveness than conventional photon-based radiotherapy (RT). Due to its higher linear energy transfer and relative biological effectiveness, CIRT is particularly effective against radioresistant tumors and those located near critical organs. Since the first dedicated CIRT facility was established in Japan in 1994, CIRT has demonstrated remarkable efficacy against various malignancies, including head and neck tumors, skull base and upper cervical spine tumors, non-small-cell lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CIRT, highlighting its clinical indications and future directions. According to clinical studies, CIRT achieves high local control rates with manageable toxicity across multiple cancer types. For instance, in head and neck tumors (e.g., adenoid cystic carcinoma and mucosal melanoma), CIRT has achieved local control rates exceeding 80%. In early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, CIRT has resulted in local control rates over 90% with minimal toxicity. Moreover, CIRT has shown promise in treating challenging cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and pancreatic cancer, where conventional therapies are limited. Nonetheless, the global adoption of CIRT remains limited due to high costs and complexity. Future directions include conducting randomized controlled trials to establish high-level evidence, integrating new technologies such as ultrahigh-dose-rate (FLASH) therapy, and expanding CIRT facilities globally with strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analyses. If these challenges are addressed, CIRT is poised to play a transformative role in cancer treatment, improving survival rates and the quality of life.