Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Background: s/Aims: The hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) is classified as the advanced stage (BCLC stage C) with extremely poor prognosis, and in current guidelines is recommended for systemic therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis after hepatic resection (HR) for patients who have HCC combined with PVTT. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 332 patients who underwent HR for HCC with PVTT at ten tertiary referral hospitals in South Korea. Results: The median overall and recurrence-free survival after HR were 32.4 and 8.6 months, while the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 75%, 48%, and 39%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, tumor number, tumor size, AFP, PIVKA−II, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and albumin–bilirubin (ALBI) grade were significant prognostic factors. The risk scoring was developed using these seven factors–tumor, inflammation and hepatic function (TIF), to predict patient prognosis. The prognosis of the patients was well stratified according to the scores (log-rank test, p < 0.001). Conclusions HR for patients who have HCC combined with PVTT provided favorable survival outcomes. The risk scoring was useful in predicting prognosis, and determining the appropriate treatment strategy for those patients who have HCC with PVTT.

Background/Aims: Bile duct invasion (BDI) is rarely observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), leading to hyperbilirubinemia. However, the efficacy of pretreatment biliary drainage for HCC patients with BDI and obstructive jaundice is currently unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of biliary drainage on the prognosis of these patients. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled a total of 200 HCC patients with BDI from multicenter cohorts. Patients without obstructive jaundice (n=99) and those who did not undergo HCC treatment (n=37) were excluded from further analysis. Finally, 64 patients with obstructive jaundice (43 subjected to drainage and 21 not subjected to drainage) were included. Propensity score matching was then conducted. Results: The biliary drainage group showed longer overall survival (median 10.13 months vs 4.43 months, p=0.004) and progression-free survival durations (median 7.00 months vs 1.97 months, p<0.001) than the non-drainage group. Multivariate analysis showed that biliary drainage was a significantly favorable prognostic factor for overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.42; p=0.006) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.30; p<0.001). Furthermore, in the evaluation of first response after HCC treatment, biliary drainage was beneficial (p=0.005). Remarkably, the durations of overall survival (p=0.032) and progression-free survival (p=0.004) were similar after propensity score matching. Conclusions Biliary drainage is an independent favorable prognostic factor for HCC patients with BDI and obstructive jaundice. Therefore, biliary drainage should be contemplated in the treatment of advanced HCC with BDI to improve survival outcomes.

Whether advanced age is associated with poor outcomes of elderly patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is controversial. This study aimed to evaluate age effect and predictors for mortality in elderly AKI patients undergoing CRRT. Methods: Data of 480 elderly AKI patients who underwent CRRT were retrospectively analyzed. Subjects were stratified into two groups according to age: younger-old (age, 65–74 years; n = 205) and older-old (age, ≥75 years; n = 275). Predictors for 28-day and 90-day mortality and age effects were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression analysis and propensity score matching. Results: Urine output at the start of CRRT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99–1.00; p = 0.04), operation (aHR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30–0.93; p = 0.03), and use of an intra-aortic balloon pump (aHR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.18–10.96; p = 0.02) were predictors for 28-day mortality. Ischemic heart disease (aHR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.02–2.98; p = 0.04) and use of a ventilator (aHR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36–0.89; p = 0.01) were predictors for 90-day mortality. The older-old group did not exhibit a higher risk for 28- day or 90-day mortality than the younger-old group in multivariable or propensity score-matched models. Conclusion: Advanced age was not a risk factor for mortality among elderly AKI patients undergoing CRRT, suggesting that advanced age should not be considered for therapeutic decisions in critically ill elderly patients with AKI requiring CRRT.

Multiple risk factors are involved in new-onset diabetes mellitus (DM) after organ transplantation; however, their ability to predict clinical prognosis remains unclear. Therefore, we investigated whether patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) could help predict DM development before performing kidney transplantation (KT). Methods: We first performed whole transcriptome and functional enrichment analyses of KT patient-derived iPSCs. Our results revealed that insulin resistance, type 2 DM, and transforming growth factor beta signaling pathways are associated between the groups of DM and non-DM. We next determined whether the genetic background was associated with development of iPSCs into pancreatic progenitor (PP) cells. Results: The levels of differentiation-related key markers of PP cells were significantly lower in the DM group than in the non-DM group. Moreover, the results of tacrolimus toxicity screening showed a significant decrease in the number of PP cells of the DM group compared with the non-DM group, suggesting that these cells are more susceptible to tacrolimus toxicity. Conclusion: Taken together, these results indicate that PP cells of the DM group showed low developmental potency accompanied by a significantly different genetic background compared with the non-DM group. Thus, genetic analysis can be used to predict the risk of DM before KT.