Objective: This study aims to understand the structure of meaning in life among patients with cancer through the validation of the Meaning in Life Scale among Korean patients (K-MiLS) with cancer. Methods: From August 2021 to November 2022, participants were recruited from multiple sites in South Korea. Participants completed related questionnaires, including the MiLS, on the web or mobile. Test-retest reliability was assessed between 2 and 4 weeks after the initial assessment. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and Pearson’s correlations were used to evaluate the reliability and validity of the MiLS. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the sociodemographic and disease-related variables correlated with the MiLS. Regarding concurrent validity, a hierarchical regression analysis was performed. Results: The results (n=345) indicated that the K-MiLS has a four-factor structure: Harmony and Peace; Life Perspective, Purpose, and Goals; Confusion and Lessened Meaning; and Benefits of Spirituality. Regarding convergent and discriminant validity, K-MiLS was negatively correlated with Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, and Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory while showing a significantly positive correlation with the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, Self-Compassion Scale, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, and Functional Social Support Questionnaire. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that the demographic variable influencing MiLS was religious affiliation. Conclusion The K-MiLS had a multidimensional four-factor structure similar to that of the original version. It is also a reliable and valid measure for assessing cancer survivors’ meaning in life after a cancer diagnosis.

Hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombosis presents a significant therapeutic challenge due to its poor prognosis and limited treatment options. This review thoroughly examines diagnostic methods, including imaging techniques and classification systems such as the Japanese Vp and Cheng’s classifications, to aid in clinical decision-making. Treatment strategies encompass liver resection and liver transplantation, particularly living donor liver transplantation after successful downstaging, which have shown potential benefits in selected cases. Locoregional therapies, including hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy, transarterial chemoembolization, transarterial radioembolization, and external beam radiation therapy, remain vital components of treatment. Recent advancements in systemic therapies, such as sorafenib, lenvatinib, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., atezolizumab plus bevacizumab) have demonstrated improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival. These developments underscore the importance of a multidisciplinary and personalized approach to improve outcomes for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein tumor thrombosis.

Background/Aims: Elevated troponin levels predict in-hospital mortality and influence decisions regarding thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). However, the usefulness of high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) regarding PE remains uncertain. We aimed to establish the optimal cut-off level and compare its performance for precise risk stratification. Methods: 374 patients diagnosed with acute PE were reviewed. PE-related adverse outcomes, a composite of PE-related deaths, cardiopulmonary resuscitation incidents, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, and all-cause mortality within 30 days were evaluated. The optimal hsTnT cut-off for all-cause mortality, and the net reclassification index (NRI) was used to assess the incremental value in risk stratification. Results: Among 343 normotensive patients, 17 (5.0%) experienced all-cause mortality, while 40 (10.7%) had PE-related adverse outcomes. An optimal hsTnT cut-off value of 60 ng/L for all-cause mortality (AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.61–0.85, p < 0.001) was identified, which was significantly associated with PE-related adverse outcomes (OR 4.07, 95% CI 2.06–8.06, p < 0.001). Patients with hsTnT ≥ 60 ng/L were older, hypotensive, had higher creatinine levels, and right ventricular dysfunction signs. Combining hsTnT ≥ 60 ng/L with simplified pulmonary embolism severity index ≥1 provided additional prognostic information. Reclassification analysis showed a significant shift in risk categories, with an NRI of 1.016 ± 0.201 (p < 0.001). Conclusions We refined troponin’s predictive value in patients with acute PE, proposing a new cut-off value of hsTnT ≥ 60 ng/L. Validation through large-scale studies is essential to offer clinically useful guidance for managing patient population.

Background/Aims: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) frequently occurs in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), particularly when influenced by factors such as abdominal infections, IBD flare-ups, or surgical procedures. The implications of PVT range from immediate issues such as intestinal ischemia to long-term concerns including portal hypertension and its complications. However, there is a notable gap in comprehensive studies on PVT in IBD, especially with the increasing incidence of IBD in Asia. This research aimed to evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of PVT in patients with IBD at a leading hospital in South Korea. Methods: This retrospective analysis reviewed adult patients diagnosed with both IBD and PVT from 1989 to 2021 at a renowned South Korean medical center. The study focused on patient characteristics, specifics of PVT, administered treatments, and outcomes, all confirmed through enhanced CT scans. Results: A total of 78 patients met the study’s criteria. Notably, only 20.5% (16/78) were treated with oral anticoagulants; however, a vast majority (96.2%; 75/78) achieved complete radiographic resolution (CRR). When comparing patients receiving anticoagulants to those who did not, a significant preference for anticoagulant use was observed in cases where the main portal vein was affected, as opposed to just the left or right veins (p = 0.006). However, multivariable analysis indicated that neither anticoagulant use nor previous surgeries significantly impacted CRR. Conclusions Patients with IBD and PVT generally had favorable outcomes, regardless of anticoagulant use.

Purpose: To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between traditional trans-vesical robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (TV-RASP) and the newly introduced urethral-sparing (US) RASP. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 42 patients who underwent TV-RASP (n=22) or US-RASP (n=20) performed by two experienced surgeons at two tertiary centers. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and catheterization time were assessed. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), uroflowmetry parameters, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Dysfunction-Short Form (MSHQ-EjD-SF) scores, and maintenance of anterograde ejaculation. Results: This study analyzed 22 and 20 patients who underwent TV-RASP and US-RASP, respectively. Except for the TV-RASP group being older (70.0 years) than the US-RASP group (64.5 years) (p=0.028), no differences among other baseline characteristics existed. Perioperative outcomes indicated that hospital stay and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). At postoperative month 1, the median IPSS and QoL scores were significantly better in the US-RASP group than in the TV-RASP group (p=0.001 and p=0.002, respectively). However, at months 6 and 12, no significant differences were noted in IPSS, QoL, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual urine between the two groups. Sexually active patients in the US-RASP group maintained postoperative MSHQ-EjD functional and bother scores, whereas the TV-RASP group experienced a decline. Notably, 75.0% of patients in the US-RASP group preserved antegrade ejaculation, compared to only 20.0% in the TV-RASP group (p<0.001). Conclusions US-RASP is not inferior to TV-RASP in terms of functional outcomes. In addition, US-RASP yielded more rapid symptom improvements and preserved antegrade ejaculation than TV-RASP. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings and to further investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of US-RASP.

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 elucidates the mechanism of the physiological effect of cannabidiol (CBD) by assessing its impact on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced inflammation in RWPE-1 cells and prostatitis-induced by 17β-estradiol and dihydrotestosterone in a rat model, focusing on its therapeutic potential for chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). Materials and Methods: RWPE-1 cells were stratified in vitro into three groups: (1) controls, (2) cells with LPS-induced inflammation, and (3) cells with LPS-induced inflammation and treated with CBD. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and western blots were performed on cellular components and supernatants after administration of CBD. Five groups of six Sprague–Dawley male rats were assigned: (1) control, (2) CP/CPPS, (3) CP/CPPS and treated with 50 mg/kg CBD, (4) CP/CPPS and treated with 100 mg/kg CBD, and (5) CP/CPPS and treated with 150 mg/kg CBD. Prostatitis was induced through administration of 17β-estradiol and dihydrotestosterone. After four weeks of CBD treatment, a pain index was evaluated, and prostate tissue was collected for subsequent histologic examination and western blot analysis. Results: CBD demonstrated efficacy in vivo for CP/CPPS and in vitro for inflammation. It inhibited the toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)uclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) pathway by activating the CB2 receptor, reducing expression of interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) (p<0.01). CBD exhibited analgesic effects by activating and desensitizing the TRPV1 receptor. Conclusions CBD inhibits the TLR4/NF-κB pathway by activating the CB2 receptor, desensitizes the TRPV1 receptor, and decreases the release of COX2. This results in relief of inflammation and pain in patients with CP/CPPS, indicating CBD as a potential treatment for CP/CPPS.

Idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (iNSIP) is recognized as a distinct entity among various types of idiopathic interstitial pneumonias. It is identified histologically by the nonspecific interstitial pneumonia pattern. A diagnosis of iNSIP is feasible once secondary causes or underlying diseases are ruled out. Usually presenting with respiratory symptoms such as shortness of breath and cough, iNSIP has a subacute or chronic course. It predominantly affects females aged 50 to 60 years who are non-smokers. Key imaging findings on chest high-resolution computed tomography include bilateral reticular opacities in lower lungs, traction bronchiectasis, reduced lung volumes and, ground-glass opacities. Abnormalities are typically diffuse across both lungs with subpleural distributions. Treatment often involves systemic steroids, either alone or in combination with other immunosuppressants, although evidence supporting effectiveness of these treatments is limited. Prognosis is generally more favorable for iNSIP than for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, with many studies reporting a 5-year survival rate above 70%. Antifibrotic agents should be considered in a condition, termed progressive pulmonary fibrosis, where pulmonary fibrosis progressively worsens.

Background: The development of frailty at hospital discharge affects the clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors who had no frailty before hospitalization. We aimed to describe the prevalence of new frailty using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and evaluate its associated factors in patients with severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty before hospitalization. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of clinical data from a nationwide retrospective cohort collected from 22 hospitals between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2021. The patients were at least 19 years old and survived until discharge after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of severe COVID-19. Development of new frailty was defined as a CFS score ≥5 at hospital discharge. Results: Among 669 severe COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing frailty admitted to the ICU, the mean age was 65.2±12.8 years, 62.5% were male, and 50.2% received mechanical ventilation (MV). The mean CFS score at admission was 2.4±0.9, and new frailty developed in 27.8% (186/483). In multivariate analysis, older age, cardiovascular disease, CFS score of 3–4 before hospitalization, increased C-reactive protein level, longer duration of corticosteroid treatment, and use of MV and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were identified as factors associated with new-onset frailty. Conclusion Our study suggests that new frailty is not uncommon and is associated with diverse factors in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty.

Background: This study aimed to determine whether a shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen is non-inferior to the standard 6-month tuberculosis regimen. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial enrolled participants with respiratory specimen positivity by Xpert MTB/RIF assay or Mycobacterium tuberculosis culture without rifampicin-resistance. Participants were randomized at 1:1 to the investigational or control group. The investigational group received high-dose rifampicin (30 mg/kg/day), isoniazid, and pyrazinamide until culture conversion, followed by high-dose rifampicin and isoniazid for 12 weeks. The control group received the standard 6-month regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of unfavorable outcomes at 18 months post-randomization. The non-inferiority margin was set at <6% difference in unfavorable outcomes rates. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04485156) Results: Between 4 November 2020 and 3 January 2022, 76 participants were enrolled. Of these, 58 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Unfavorable outcomes occurred in 10 (31.3%) of 32 in the control group and 10 (38.5%) of 26 in the investigational group. The difference was 7.2% (95% confidence interval, ∞ to 31.9%), failing to prove non-inferiority. Serious adverse events and grade 3 or higher adverse events did not differ between the groups. Conclusion The shorter high-dose rifampicin regimen failed to demonstrate non-inferiority but had an acceptable safety profile.