Objectives: . Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) is a significant cause of hearing loss. Intratympanic steroid injection (ITSI) is commonly used as an initial or salvage treatment; however, the lack of a standardized treatment protocol has resulted in variability in clinical practice. In addition, no efficient prediction model currently exists to support personalized management. Therefore, this study aimed to develop tailored management strategies for ISSNHL using a machine-learning model. Methods: . This retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted between January 2015 and December 2020, with data analysis performed between January 2021 and March 2024. Patients were selected based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision criteria for ISSNHL, along with relevant medication and procedure codes. Patients with pure-tone audiogram results not meeting ISSNHL criteria, better initial hearing in the affected ear, an identifiable etiology, no post-treatment audiogram, or delayed treatment (>6 weeks) were excluded. We included 770 patients diagnosed with ISSNHL who received ITSI. The primary outcome was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for prediction performance. Recovery status was determined using the last pure-tone audiogram. Modeling was conducted on the Quanta for Medical Care AI platform using five machine-learning algorithms and a nested cross-validation framework, in which feature selection and hyperparameter tuning were performed in the inner folds and model performance was evaluated in the outer folds. Results: . A random forest classifier outperformed the other models in predicting hearing outcomes, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.788. Time to ITSI was the most influential treatment-related factor, with ITSI administered within 10 days of hearing loss being associated with better outcomes. This model can be used to provide personalized prognostic estimates under different treatment protocols. Conclusion . The machine-learning-based prediction model facilitates personalized treatment strategies and timely treatment adjustments for ISSNHL, thereby optimizing the likelihood of complete recovery.

Background: Patients with coarctation of the aorta (CoA) and an interrupted aortic arch (IAA) may present with small mitral valves (MVs) and a reduced left ventricular (LV) volume. Biventricular repair (BVR) in these patients is dependent on adequate size of the left cardiac structures.Purpose: This study evaluated the impact of the hemodynamic characteristics of atrial septal defects (ASDs) on MV growth following surgical repair. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients diagnosed with CoA or IAA between 2007 and 2024. The z score for MV size measured 6 months postoperatively (Z2) was compared with the preoperative MV size (Z1). The factors associated with MV growth were also studied. Results: A total of 161 patients with CoA or IAA were included. Transthoracic echocardiography was used to assess the MV and LV dimensions preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. Of the cohort, 155 (96.3%) underwent initial BVR and 6 underwent single-ventricle palliation. MV z scores significantly increased following BVR (mean change: +0.45±1.35; P<0.001) but decreased after single-ventricle repair (-0.56±0.49, P=0.04). Multivariate analysis identified the initial MV z score and ASD pressure gradient as independent predictors of MV growth (R2=0.39). Conclusion Annular growth of the MV was not observed in patients who underwent single-ventricle palliation. In contrast, among patients who achieved BVR, those with a small preoperative MV annulus and low ASD pressure gradient demonstrated subsequent catch-up MV growth, suggesting that adequate left-sided preload is essential for MV development.

Background/Aims: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common disease with severe inflammatory processes associated with numerous gastrointestinal diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, we investigated the relationship between NAFLD and IBD and the possible risk factors associated with the diagnosis of IBD. Methods: This longitudinal nationwide cohort study investigated the risk of IBD in patients with NAFLD alone. General characteristics, comorbidities, and incidence of IBD were also compared. Results: Patients diagnosed with NAFLD had a significant risk of developing IBD compared to control individuals, who were associated with a 2.245-fold risk of the diagnosis of IBD and a 2.260- and 2.231-fold of increased diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, respectively (P< 0.001). The cumulative risk of IBD increased annually during the follow-up of patients with NAFLD (P< 0.001). Conclusions Our results emphasize that NAFLD significantly impacts its incidence in patients with NAFLD. If patients with NAFLD present with risk factors, such as diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, these conditions should be properly treated with regular follow-ups. Furthermore, we believe that these causes may be associated with the second peak of IBD.

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.

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.

Background/Aims: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common disease with severe inflammatory processes associated with numerous gastrointestinal diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, we investigated the relationship between NAFLD and IBD and the possible risk factors associated with the diagnosis of IBD. Methods: This longitudinal nationwide cohort study investigated the risk of IBD in patients with NAFLD alone. General characteristics, comorbidities, and incidence of IBD were also compared. Results: Patients diagnosed with NAFLD had a significant risk of developing IBD compared to control individuals, who were associated with a 2.245-fold risk of the diagnosis of IBD and a 2.260- and 2.231-fold of increased diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, respectively (P< 0.001). The cumulative risk of IBD increased annually during the follow-up of patients with NAFLD (P< 0.001). Conclusions Our results emphasize that NAFLD significantly impacts its incidence in patients with NAFLD. If patients with NAFLD present with risk factors, such as diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, these conditions should be properly treated with regular follow-ups. Furthermore, we believe that these causes may be associated with the second peak of IBD.

Background/Aims: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a common disease with severe inflammatory processes associated with numerous gastrointestinal diseases, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, we investigated the relationship between NAFLD and IBD and the possible risk factors associated with the diagnosis of IBD. Methods: This longitudinal nationwide cohort study investigated the risk of IBD in patients with NAFLD alone. General characteristics, comorbidities, and incidence of IBD were also compared. Results: Patients diagnosed with NAFLD had a significant risk of developing IBD compared to control individuals, who were associated with a 2.245-fold risk of the diagnosis of IBD and a 2.260- and 2.231-fold of increased diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, respectively (P< 0.001). The cumulative risk of IBD increased annually during the follow-up of patients with NAFLD (P< 0.001). Conclusions Our results emphasize that NAFLD significantly impacts its incidence in patients with NAFLD. If patients with NAFLD present with risk factors, such as diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, these conditions should be properly treated with regular follow-ups. Furthermore, we believe that these causes may be associated with the second peak of IBD.

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.