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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Chronic constipation is one of the most common digestive diseases encountered in clinical practice. Constipation manifests as a variety of symptoms, such as infrequent bowel movements, hard stools, feeling of incomplete evacuation, straining at defecation, a sense of anorectal blockage during defecation, and use of digital maneuvers to assist defecation. During the diagnosis of chronic constipation, the Bristol Stool Form Scale, colonoscopy, and a digital rectal examination are useful for objective symptom evaluation and differential diagnosis of secondary constipation. Physiological tests for functional constipation have complementary roles and are recommended for patients who have failed to respond to treatment with available laxatives and those who are strongly suspected of having a defecatory disorder. As new evidence on the diagnosis and management of functional constipation emerged, the need to revise the previous guideline was suggested. Therefore, these evidence-based guidelines have proposed recommendations developed using a systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment options available for functional constipation. The benefits and cautions of new pharmacological agents (such as lubiprostone and linaclotide) and conventional laxatives have been described through a meta-analysis. The guidelines consist of 34 recommendations, including 3 concerning the definition and epidemiology of functional constipation, 9 regarding diagnoses, and 22 regarding managements. Clinicians (including primary physicians, general health professionals, medical students, residents, and other healthcare professionals) and patients can refer to these guidelines to make informed decisions regarding the management of functional constipation.

Background/Aims: Efficient anti-fibrotic therapies are required for the treatment of liver cirrhosis. Hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been reported to have anti-fibrotic effects. Here, we investigated whether combined treatment with a statin and a COX-2 inhibitor has synergistic anti-fibrotic effects. Methods: The effects of treatment strategies incorporating both simvastatin and a COX-2 inhibitor, NS-398, were investigated using an immortalized human hepatic stellate cell line (LX-2) and a hepatic fibrosis mouse model developed using thioacetamide (TAA) in drinking water. Cellular proliferation was investigated via 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine uptake. Pro- and anti-apoptotic factors were investigated through Western blotting and real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis. Results: The evaluation of the anti-proliferative effects on LX-2 cells showed that the observed effects were more pronounced with combination therapy than with single-drug therapy. Moreover, hepatic fibrosis and collagen deposition decreased significantly in TAA-treated mice in response to the combined treatment strategy. The mechanisms underlying the anti-fibrotic effects of the combination therapy were investigated. The effects of the combination therapy were correlated with increased expression levels of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 signaling molecules, upregulation of the Bax/Bcl-2 signaling pathway, inhibition of the transforming growth factor-β signaling pathway, and inhibition of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases 1 and 2. Conclusions The combination of simvastatin and NS-398 resulted in a synergistic anti-fibrotic effect through multiple pathways. These findings offer a theoretical insight into the possible clinical application of this strategy for the treatment of advanced liver diseases with hepatic fibrosis.

Background/Aims: Sorafenib is the first approved systemic treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, its clinical utility is limited, especially in Asian countries. Several reports have suggested the survival benefits of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for advanced HCC with main portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT). This study aimed to compare the efficacy of sorafenib-based therapy with that of HAIC-based therapy for advanced HCC with main PVTT. Methods: Advanced HCC patients with main PVTT treated with sorafenib or HAIC between 2008 and 2016 at Korea University Medical Center were included. We evaluated overall survival (OS), time-to-progression (TTP), and the disease control rate (DCR). Results: Seventy-three patients were treated with sorafenib (n=35) or HAIC (n=38). Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups, except the presence of solid organ metastasis (46% vs 5.3%, p<0.001). The median OS time was not significantly different between the groups (6.4 months vs 10.0 months, p=0.139). TTP was longer in the HAIC group than in the sorafenib group (2.1 months vs 6.2 months, p=0.006). The DCR was also better in the HAIC group than in the sorafenib group (37% vs 76%, p=0.001). Subgroup analysis, which excluded patients with extrahepatic solid organ metastasis, showed the same trends for the median OS time (8.8 months vs 11.1 months, p=0.097), TTP (1.9 months vs 6.0 months, p<0.001), and DCR (53% vs 81%, p=0.030). Conclusions HAIC-based therapy may be an alternative to sorafenib for advanced HCC with main PVTT by providing longer TTP and a better DCR.

Background: Prognosis of patients with diverse chronic diseases is reportedly associated with 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels. In this study, we investigated the potential role of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25[OH]D3) levels in improving the predictive power of conventional prognostic models for patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods: We investigated clinical findings, including serum 25(OH)D3 levels at admission, of 155 patients with cirrhosis who were followed up for a median of 16.9 months. Results: Median 25(OH)D3 levels were significantly different among patients exhibiting Child-Pugh grades A, B, and C. Mortality, including urgent transplantation, was significantly associated with 25(OH)D3 levels in univariate analysis. Severe vitamin-D deficiency (serum 25[OH]D3 level < 5.0 ng/mL) was significantly related to increased mortality, even after adjusting for Child-Pugh and Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. In particular, the presence of severe vitamin D deficiency clearly defined a subgroup with significantly poorer survival among patients with Child-Pugh scores of 5–10 or MELD scores ≤ 20. A new combination model of MELD score and severe vitamin D deficiency showed significantly more accurate predictive power for short- and long-term mortality than MELD scores alone. Additionally, serum 25(OH)D3 levels and new model scores were significantly associated with the development of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, overt encephalopathy, and acute kidney injury. Conclusion Serum 25(OH)D3 level is an independent prognostic factor for patients with liver cirrhosis and has a differential impact on disease outcomes according to MELD and Child-Pugh scores.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In addition to the globally endorsed Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, other algorithms or staging systems have been developed, including the Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) staging system. This study aimed to validate the HKLC staging system relative to the BCLC staging system for predicting survival for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients in Korea. METHODS: From 2004 to 2013, 2,571 patients newly diagnosed with HCC were consecutively enrolled at three Korea University medical centers. RESULTS: Both staging systems differentiated survival well (p < 0.001). However, 1-year and 3-year survival were predicted better using the HKLC system than the BCLC system (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.869 vs 0.856 for 1 year, p=0.002; 0.841 vs 0.827 for 3 years, p=0.010). In hypothetical survival curves, the HKLC system exhibited better median overall survival than the BCLC system (33.1 months vs 19.2 months). In evaluations of prognosis according to either BCLC or HKLC treatment guidelines, risk of death was reduced in the group following only HKLC guidelines compared with the group following only BCLC guidelines (hazard ratio, 0.601; 95% confidence interval, 0.443 to 0.816; p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although both staging systems predicted and discriminated HCC prognoses well, the HKLC system showed more encouraging survival benefits than the BCLC system.
Academic Medical Centers ; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular ; Hong Kong ; Humans ; Korea ; Liver Neoplasms ; Liver ; Neoplasm Staging ; Prognosis ; ROC Curve