Background/Aims: Combination immunotherapy, exemplified by atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, has become the standard of care for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the lack of predictive biomarkers and limited understanding of response mechanisms remain a challenge. Methods: Using data from the IMbrave150plus cohort, we applied an immune signature score (ISS) predictor to stratify HCC patients treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or with sorafenib alone into potential high and low response groups. By applying multiple statistical approaches including a Bayesian covariate prediction algorithm, we refined the signature to 10 key genes (ISS10) for clinical use while maintaining similar predictive power to the full model. We further validated ISS10 in an independent HCC cohort treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Results: The study identified a significant association between the ISS and treatment response. Among patients classified as high responders, those treated with the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab combination exhibited improved overall and progression-free survival as well as better objective response rate compared to those treated with sorafenib. We also observed a significant correlation between ISS10 and response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment. Analysis of immune cell subpopulations revealed distinct characteristics associated with ISS subtypes. In particular, the ISS10 high subtype displayed a more favorable immune environment with higher proportions of antitumor macrophages and activated T-cells, potentially explaining its better response. Conclusions Our study suggests that ISS and ISS10 are promising predictive biomarkers for enhanced therapeutic outcomes in HCC patients undergoing combination immunotherapy. These markers are crucial for refining patient stratification and personalized treatment approaches to advance the effectiveness of standard-of-care regimens.

Objective: This study tried to observe clinical benefit of aripiprazole augmentation (ARPA) treatment for major depressive disorder with anxious distress (MDDA) in routine practice. Methods: Retrospective chart review (n = 41) was conducted for clinical benefit of ARPA in patients with MDDA in routine practice. The primary endpoint was the mean change of Hamilton Anxiety Rating scale (HAMA) total scores from baseline to the endpoint. Additional secondary endpoints were also retrieved. Results: The changes of primary endpoint HAMA (t = 5.731, −4.6, p = 0.001), and secondary endpoints including Hamilton Depression Rating scale (HAMD, t = 4.284, −3.4, p ＜ 0.001), Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB, −0.9, t = 1.821, p = 0.026), and Clinical Global Impression Score-Severity (CGI-S, t = 3.556, −0.4, p ＜ 0.001) scores were also significantly improved during the study. No significant adverse events were observed. Conclusion This study has shown additional benefit of ARPA treatment for MDDA patients in routine practice. However, adequately-powered and well-controlled studies are necessary for generalization of the present findings.

Neurological diseases often manifest with neuropsychiatric symptoms such as depression, emotional incontinence, anger, apathy and fatigue. In addition, affected patients may also experience psychotic symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions. Various factors contribute to the development of psychotic symptoms, and the mechanisms of psychosis are similar, but still differ among various neurological diseases. Although psychotic symptoms are uncommon, and have been less well investigated, they may annoy patients and their families as well as impair the patients’ quality of life and increase the caregiver burden. Therefore, we need to appropriately identify and treat these psychotic symptoms in patients with neurological diseases.

Background: Water electrospray technology has been developed and extensively studied for its physical properties and potential application as a non-chemical biocide against airborne pathogens. However, there are still concerns regarding the safety and potential toxicity of inhaling water electrospray (WE) particles. To address these potential hazards and offer insights into the impact of WE on humans, we analyzed the immunopathological response to WE by employing an intranasal challenge C57BL/6 mouse model. This analysis aimed to compare the effects of WE with those of sodium hypochlorite (SH), a well-known biocidal agent. Results: The study findings suggest that the WE did not trigger any pathological immune reactions in the intranasal-challenged C57BL/6 mouse model. Mice challenged with WE did not experience body weight loss, and there was no increase in inflammatory cytokine production compared to SH-treated mice. Histopathological analysis revealed that WE did not cause any damage to the lung tissue. In contrast, mice treated with SH exhibited significant lung tissue damage, characterized by the infiltration of neutrophils and eosinophils. Transcriptomic analysis of lung tissue further confirmed the absence of a pathological immune response in mice treated with WE compared to those treated with SH. Upon intranasal challenge with WE, the C57BL/6 mouse model did not show any evidence of immunopathological damage. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that WE is a safe technology for disinfecting airborne pathogens. It demonstrated little to no effect on immune system activation and pathological outcomes in the intranasal challenge C57BL/6 mouse model. These findings not only support the potential use of WE as an effective and safe method for air disinfection but also highlight the value of the intranasal challenge of the C57BL/6 mouse model in providing significant immunopathological insights for assessing the inhalation of novel materials for potential use.

Background: This study aimed to identify the specific T cell co-stimulatory and co-inhibitory factors that play prognostic roles in patients with glioblastoma. Additionally, the unique histone H3 modification enzymes that regulate the expression levels of these specific costimulatory and co-inhibitory factors were investigated. Methods: The medical records of 84 patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma at our institution from January 2006 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.Immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for T cell co-stimulatory factors (CD27, CD28, CD137, OX40, and ICOS), T cell co-inhibitory factors (CTLA4, PD1, PD-L1, TIM3, and CD200R), and histone H3 lysine modification enzymes (MLL4, RIZ, EZH1, NSD2, KDM5c, JMJD1a, UTX, and JMJD5) was performed on archived paraffin-embedded tissues obtained by biopsy or resection. Quantitative real time-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) was performed for specific factors, which demonstrated causal relationships, in order to validate the findings of the IHC examinations. Results: The mean follow-up duration was 27.5 months (range, 4.1–43.5 months). During this period, 76 patients (90.5%) died, and the mean OS was 19.4 months (95% confidence interval, 16.3–20.9 months). Linear positive correlations were observed between the expression levels of CD28 and JMJD1a (R2 linear = 0.982) and those of CD137 and UTX (R2 linear = 1.528). Alternatively, significant negative correlations were observed between the expression levels of CTLA4 and RIZ (R2 linear = −1.746) and those of PD-L1 and EZH1 (R2 linear = −2.118); relationships were confirmed by qRT-PCR. In the multivariate analysis, increased expression levels of CD28 (P = 0.042), and CD137 (P = 0.009), and decreased expression levels of CTLA4 (P = 0.003), PD-L1 (P = 0.020), and EZH1 (P = 0.040) were significantly associated with longer survival. Conclusion These findings suggest that the expression of certain T cell co-stimulatory factors, such as CD28 and CD 137, and co-inhibitory factors, such as CTLA4 and PD-L1 are associated with prognosis of glioblastoma patients.

Objective: Anxious depression is associated with greater chronicity, higher severity of symptoms, more severe functional impairment, and poor response to drug treatment. However, evidence for first-choice antidepressants in patients with anxious depression is limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of escitalopram, desvenlafaxine, and vortioxetine in the acute treatment of anxious depression. Methods: Patients (n = 124) with major depressive disorder and high levels of anxiety were randomly assigned to an escitalopram treatment group (n = 42), desvenlafaxine treatment group (n = 40), or vortioxetine treatment group (n = 42) in a 6-week randomized rater-blinded head-to-head comparative trial. Changes in overall depressive and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), respectively. Results: Patients demonstrated similar baseline-to-endpoint improvement in scores and similar response and remission rates for HAMD and HAMA. Analysis of the individual HAMD items revealed that desvenlafaxine significantly reduced anxiety somatic scores (p= 0.013) and hypochondriasis scores (p = 0.014) compared to escitalopram. With respect to the individual HAMA items, desvenlafaxine treatment showed significantly lower scores for respiratory symptoms (p = 0.013) than escitalopram treatment and cardiovascular symptoms (p = 0.005) than vortioxetine treatment. The treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences. Conclusion Our results indicated no significant differences in the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram, desvenlafaxine, and vortioxetine in this subtype of patients with anxious depression during the acute phase of treatment.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of escitalopram, vortioxetine, and desvenlafaxine for acute treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with cognitive complaint (CC). Methods: A total of 129 patients with MDD who also complained of CC were randomized evenly to either escitalopram, vortioxetine, or desvenlafaxine group and underwent a multi-center, six-week, rater-blinded, and head-to-head comparative trial. Differences in depressive symptoms following treatment were measured using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Subjective cognitive function and the presence of adverse events were assessed. Results: The three antidepressant treatment groups did not show significant differences in the improvement of depressive symptoms as measured by HAMD and MADRS. Desvenlafaxine treatment was associated with a superior treatment response rate in depressive symptoms compared to vortioxetine or escitalopram treatment. However, no significant differences were found in the remission rate of depressive symptoms. The three antidepressant treatment groups did not show significant differences in the improvement of CC. Adverse profiles of each treatment group were tolerable, with no significant differences. Conclusion In acute antidepressant treatment for MDD with CC, escitalopram, vortioxetine, and desvenlafaxine presented similar efficacy in relief of depressive symptoms; however, desvenlafaxine was associated with a superior treatment. Further studies are needed to confirm these results by investigating the therapeutic efficacy and safety profile of long-term antidepressant treatment of MDD with CC (Clinical Trial Registry, http://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/en/: KCT0002173).