Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

6-gingerol, a bioactive compound from ginger, has demonstrated promising anticancer properties across various cancer models by inducing apoptosis and inhibiting cell proliferation and invasion. In this study, we explore its mechanisms against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a notably aggressive and treatment-resistant brain tumor. We found that 6-gingerol crosses the blood-brain barrier more effectively than curcumin, enhancing its potential as a therapeutic agent for brain tumors. Our experiments show that 6-gingerol reduces cell proliferation and triggers apoptosis in GBM cell lines by disrupting cellular energy homeostasis. This process involves an increase in mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (mtROS) and a decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential, primarily due to the downregulation of manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD). Additionally, 6-gingerol reduces ERK phosphorylation by inhibiting EGFR and RAF, leading to G1 phase cell cycle arrest. These findings indicate that 6-gingerol promotes cell death in GBM cells by modulating MnSOD and ROS levels and arresting the cell cycle through the ERFR-RAF-1/MEK/ ERK signaling pathway, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic agent for GBM and setting the stage for future clinical research.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Objectives: Concerns about erythropoietin (EPO) therapy for anemia in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) contributing to potential bone loss and increased fracture risks are growing. This study investigated the impact of EPO administration on the risk of common osteoporotic fractures in ESRD patients. Methods: This population-based retrospective cohort study compared EPO users and non-EPO users among ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis, diagnosed with ESRD between 2000 and 2014 identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. The cohorts were matched at a propensity score ratio of 1:1, resulting in equal sample sizes of 2839. Variables related to comorbidities were considered. Results: EPO users exhibited higher cumulative incidences of major osteoporotic fractures, hip fractures, spine fractures, and wrist fractures compared with the non-EPO user (all P < 0.001). In adjusted Cox regression models, higher adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios (aSHRs) were observed for major osteoporotic fractures (2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.01–2.89), osteoporotic hip fractures (2.19, 95% CI = 1.69–2.85), spine fractures (2.50, 95% CI = 1.87–3.34), and wrist fractures (2.34, 95% CI = 1.44–3.78) in EPO users than in nonEPO users. The risk of major osteoporotic fractures significantly increased with increasing EPO doses (P for trend < 0.0001), and a similar trend was observed for the risks of osteoporotic spine and wrist fractures. Conclusions Our findings suggest that EPO treatment in patients with ESRD undergoing hemodialysis is associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures.

Objectives: Concerns about erythropoietin (EPO) therapy for anemia in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) contributing to potential bone loss and increased fracture risks are growing. This study investigated the impact of EPO administration on the risk of common osteoporotic fractures in ESRD patients. Methods: This population-based retrospective cohort study compared EPO users and non-EPO users among ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis, diagnosed with ESRD between 2000 and 2014 identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. The cohorts were matched at a propensity score ratio of 1:1, resulting in equal sample sizes of 2839. Variables related to comorbidities were considered. Results: EPO users exhibited higher cumulative incidences of major osteoporotic fractures, hip fractures, spine fractures, and wrist fractures compared with the non-EPO user (all P < 0.001). In adjusted Cox regression models, higher adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios (aSHRs) were observed for major osteoporotic fractures (2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.01–2.89), osteoporotic hip fractures (2.19, 95% CI = 1.69–2.85), spine fractures (2.50, 95% CI = 1.87–3.34), and wrist fractures (2.34, 95% CI = 1.44–3.78) in EPO users than in nonEPO users. The risk of major osteoporotic fractures significantly increased with increasing EPO doses (P for trend < 0.0001), and a similar trend was observed for the risks of osteoporotic spine and wrist fractures. Conclusions Our findings suggest that EPO treatment in patients with ESRD undergoing hemodialysis is associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures.