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: Obesity and metabolic syndrome are acknowledged as key factors contributing to the development of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Vitamin D (VitD) is a multifaceted secosteroid hormone known for its anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory properties, with its deficiency often linked to obesity. Our study aimed to investigate whether VitD supplementation could mitigate the liver pathology associated with NAFLD. Materials and Methods: The NAFLD model was developed by subjecting male C57BL/6 mice to a high-fat diet (HFD) for 14 weeks.These mice were supplemented with VitD through intraperitoneal injection at a dosage of 7 μg/kg, administered three times per week for 7 weeks. Results: HFD resulted in VitD deficiency, insulin resistance, and increased liver weight. It elevated serum levels of liver aminotransferases and triglyceride, ultimately leading to steatohepatitis with fibrosis. This model exhibited increased levels of transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1, pro-inflammatory cytokines, HNF4α transcription factors, reactive oxygen species (ROS), renin-angiotensin system activity, and epithelial-mesenchymal transitions (EMT) within the liver. Supplementation with VitD resulted in the recovery of liver weight, improvement in histologic features associated with steatohepatitis, and reduction in alanine aminotransferases and triglyceride levels induced by the HFD. Additionally, it mitigated the HFD-induced over-expressions of TGF-β1 and fibrosis-related genes, along with pro-inflammatory cytokines and ROS. Notably, no adverse effect was found due to VitD supplementation in this model. Conclusion VitD ameliorates steatohepatitis within obesity-induced NAFLD through its multifaceted pathways. VitD supplementation emerges as a potentially safe, cost-effective, and direct treatment approach for NAFLD patients dealing with obesity or metabolic dysfunction.

Purpose: We investigated the results of endoscopic fenestration for deeply located intracranial cysts (DLICs), risk factors for reoperation, and symptom improvement. Materials and Methods: We included 51 patients with DLICs who underwent endoscopic fenestration between November 2006 and October 2022. The median age was 5±20 years (6 days–67 years), and 36 (70.6%) patients were aged <20 years. The male-tofemale ratio was 1.3:1. The ventriculoscope was used to fenestrate the cysts, which had diameters under 4.5 mm. The volume of DLICs was measured separately on serial magnetic resonance imaging, and the patients were followed up for 32±40 months. Results: The mean preoperative volume of DLICs was 63.5±87.4 cm, 3 , which decreased to 23.7±56.2 cm 3postoperatively, with a 45.4%±32.1% decrease rate in 32 months. All DLICs were approached appropriately, avoiding the eloquent areas. Overall, 39 (76.5%) patients showed symptom improvement after a single operation, which was preserved without recurrence, whereas 12 (23.5%) underwent a second operation [shunting (17.6%) or repeating the endoscopic fenestration (5.9%)] owing to symptom aggravation and recurrent cysts. Patients aged <12 months showed 7.4 times more re-operation rate (p>0.046) and 7.4 times less symptom improvement (p=0.038) compared to those with older age. Females showed 6.5 times more re-operation rate (p=0.037) and 7.1 times less symptom improvement (p=0.027) than males. No patients experienced complications such as cerebrospinal fluid leakage, postoperative hemorrhage, or infection. Conclusion Endoscopic surgery is feasible for the treatment of DLICs. Female sex and age <12 months are risk factors for re-operation and less symptom improvement.

Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between distal fusion level in correction and fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and radiologic changes in the sacroiliac (SI) joint. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent correction and fusion for AIS between 2005 and 2017 with at least 5 years of follow-up. We categorized patients into two groups: Group 1 (distal fusion above L2, 74 patients) and Group 2 (distal fusion at L3 and below, 52 patients). Radiologic parameters and SI joint changes were evaluated on plain radiographs obtained from preoperative to 5 years postoperatively. We also investigated other risk factors for SI joint change. Results: Analysis of demographic factors revealed no significant difference between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the incidence of SI joint change between Group 1 (5 patients, 6.75%) and Group 2 (18 patients, 34.61%), with Group 2 showing a faster increase in incidence according to the Kaplan-Meier method (p<0.0001). Preoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) and ΔLL had a significant relationship with SI joint changes [preoperative LL, hazard ratio (HR)=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.64– 0.93, p=0.008; ΔLL, HR=0.79, 95% CI=0.67–0.95, p=0.01). Conclusion After AIS surgery, patients who had fusion to the lower lumbar vertebrae (L3 or L4) experienced a higher incidence and faster progression of degenerative changes in the SI joint. Low preoperative LL and inadequate correction of LL during the operation were also risk factors for SI joint degeneration.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

The anticancer drugs have evolved significantly, spanning molecular targeted therapeutics (MTTs), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Complications associated with these drugs vary widely based on their mechanisms of action. MTTs that target angiogenesis can often lead to complications related to ischemia or endothelial damage across various organs, whereas non-anti-angiogenic MTTs present unique complications derived from their specific pharmacological actions. ICIs are predominantly associated with immunerelated adverse events, such as pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, thyroid disorders, hypophysitis, and sarcoid-like reactions. CAR-T therapy causes unique and severe complications including cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. ADCs tend to cause complications associated with cytotoxic payloads. A comprehensive understanding of these drug-specific toxicities, particularly using medical imaging, is essential for providing optimal patient care. Based on this knowledge, radiologists can play a pivotal role in multidisciplinary teams. Therefore, radiologists must stay up-to-date on the imaging characteristics of these complications and the mechanisms underlying novel anticancer drugs.

Clinical trials for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy are in the early stages but are expected to progress alongside new treatment approaches. This suggests that imaging will play an important role in monitoring disease progression, treatment response, and treatment-related side effects. There are, however, challenges that remain unresolved, regarding imaging in CAR T-cell therapy. We herein discuss the role of imaging, focusing on how tumor response evaluation varies according to cancer type and target antigens in CAR T-cell therapy. CAR T-cell therapy often produces rapid and significant responses, and imaging is vital for identifying side effects such as cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity. Radiologists should be aware of drug mechanisms, response assessments, and associated toxicities to effectively support these therapies. Additionally, this article highlights the importance of the Lugano criteria, which is essential for standardized assessment of treatment response, particularly in lymphoma therapies, and also explores other factors influencing imaging-based evaluation, including emerging methodologies and their potential to improve the accuracy and consistency of response assessments.

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

The anticancer drugs have evolved significantly, spanning molecular targeted therapeutics (MTTs), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Complications associated with these drugs vary widely based on their mechanisms of action. MTTs that target angiogenesis can often lead to complications related to ischemia or endothelial damage across various organs, whereas non-anti-angiogenic MTTs present unique complications derived from their specific pharmacological actions. ICIs are predominantly associated with immunerelated adverse events, such as pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, thyroid disorders, hypophysitis, and sarcoid-like reactions. CAR-T therapy causes unique and severe complications including cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. ADCs tend to cause complications associated with cytotoxic payloads. A comprehensive understanding of these drug-specific toxicities, particularly using medical imaging, is essential for providing optimal patient care. Based on this knowledge, radiologists can play a pivotal role in multidisciplinary teams. Therefore, radiologists must stay up-to-date on the imaging characteristics of these complications and the mechanisms underlying novel anticancer drugs.

Clinical trials for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy are in the early stages but are expected to progress alongside new treatment approaches. This suggests that imaging will play an important role in monitoring disease progression, treatment response, and treatment-related side effects. There are, however, challenges that remain unresolved, regarding imaging in CAR T-cell therapy. We herein discuss the role of imaging, focusing on how tumor response evaluation varies according to cancer type and target antigens in CAR T-cell therapy. CAR T-cell therapy often produces rapid and significant responses, and imaging is vital for identifying side effects such as cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity. Radiologists should be aware of drug mechanisms, response assessments, and associated toxicities to effectively support these therapies. Additionally, this article highlights the importance of the Lugano criteria, which is essential for standardized assessment of treatment response, particularly in lymphoma therapies, and also explores other factors influencing imaging-based evaluation, including emerging methodologies and their potential to improve the accuracy and consistency of response assessments.