Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age. Materials and Methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability. Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend. Conclusion Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.

Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age. Materials and Methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability. Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend. Conclusion Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.

Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age. Materials and Methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability. Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend. Conclusion Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.

Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age. Materials and Methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability. Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend. Conclusion Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.

Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age. Materials and Methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability. Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend. Conclusion Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.

Background: Genetically immunodeficient mice lacking Il2rg and Rag2 genes have been widely utilized in the field of biomedical research. However, immunodeficient rats, which offer the advantage of larger size, have not been as extensively used to date. Recently, Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) rats were generated using CRISPR/ Cas9 system, targeting Il2rg and Rag2 in National BioResource Project in Japan. We imported and investigated more detailed phenotypes of wild-type (WT) Il2rg knockout (KO), Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats for 20 weeks. Results: During experiments, Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats showed decreased white blood cells and sys‑ temic lymphopenia, with reduced CD4+, CD8+ T cells and CD161+ NK cells. Additionally, all KO strains exhibited reduced relative spleen weights, hypoplasia of the germinal center in the white pulp, and atrophy with the disap‑ pearance of the boundary between the cortex and medulla in the thymus, compared to WT rats. Furthermore, we established human acute lymphoblastic leukemia xenograft rat model by intravenously injecting 5.0 × ­106 cells/kg of NALM6 cells into Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats. Conclusions These findings indicate that Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO, and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats exhibited SCID phenotypes, sug‑ gesting their potential application as immunodeficient animal models for tumor xenograft studies.

Background: Lac color, a natural red dye derived from the larvae of laccifer lacca kerr, is one of the most commonly used substances in food. To date, no studies have reported on the antigenicity of lac color and the other biomarkers that can determine anaphylactic reactions. To address this, we evaluated the antigenicity of lac color through active systemic anaphylaxis (ASA) in addition to identifying potential biomarkers performing exploratory studies. For ASA test, Guinea pigs (n = 5) were sensitized with 0(negative control), 4 mg/kg of lac color, 4 mg/kg of lac color + FCA, and 5 mg/kg of ovalbumin + FCA (positive control) 3 times a week for three weeks. Fourteen days after the last sensi‑ tization, animals were challenged intravenously weekly for two weeks. Hematological and histopathological analyses were performed and compared to control groups. Results: In the ASA test, all lac color groups showed mild symptoms such as nose rubbing, urination, and evacuation, which are insufficient indicators of anaphylaxis. Exploratory studies identified several biomarkers: decreased platelet count, and increased basophil count; distention in the lung, and redness on the inner wall of trachea; mononuclear inflammatory cell infiltration (MICI) in the ear, and heart hemorrhage. When these biomarkers were applied to the ASA test of lac color, in comparison to the negative control group, the positive control group (ovalbumin + FCA) showed a significant over 60-fold reduction in platelet count and nearly threefold higher basophil count compared to other groups. Furthermore, only positive control group exhibited full lung distention and severe redness on the inner wall of the trachea. Mononuclear inflammatory cell infiltration (MICI) in the ear was about three times higher, and heart hemorrhage was only present in the positive control group compared to others. None of the lac color groups were different from the negative control group (p > 0.05), whereas the positive control group was significantly different (p < 0.05). Conclusions Our study concludes that lac color, at the tested concentrations, does not induce antigenicity in the guinea pig model, providing valuable safety data. Furthermore, the biomarkers identified in this study offer a supportive approach to evaluating the immunogenicity of substances in future research.

Background: Genetically immunodeficient mice lacking Il2rg and Rag2 genes have been widely utilized in the field of biomedical research. However, immunodeficient rats, which offer the advantage of larger size, have not been as extensively used to date. Recently, Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) rats were generated using CRISPR/ Cas9 system, targeting Il2rg and Rag2 in National BioResource Project in Japan. We imported and investigated more detailed phenotypes of wild-type (WT) Il2rg knockout (KO), Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats for 20 weeks. Results: During experiments, Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats showed decreased white blood cells and sys‑ temic lymphopenia, with reduced CD4+, CD8+ T cells and CD161+ NK cells. Additionally, all KO strains exhibited reduced relative spleen weights, hypoplasia of the germinal center in the white pulp, and atrophy with the disap‑ pearance of the boundary between the cortex and medulla in the thymus, compared to WT rats. Furthermore, we established human acute lymphoblastic leukemia xenograft rat model by intravenously injecting 5.0 × ­106 cells/kg of NALM6 cells into Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats. Conclusions These findings indicate that Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO, and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats exhibited SCID phenotypes, sug‑ gesting their potential application as immunodeficient animal models for tumor xenograft studies.

Background: Lac color, a natural red dye derived from the larvae of laccifer lacca kerr, is one of the most commonly used substances in food. To date, no studies have reported on the antigenicity of lac color and the other biomarkers that can determine anaphylactic reactions. To address this, we evaluated the antigenicity of lac color through active systemic anaphylaxis (ASA) in addition to identifying potential biomarkers performing exploratory studies. For ASA test, Guinea pigs (n = 5) were sensitized with 0(negative control), 4 mg/kg of lac color, 4 mg/kg of lac color + FCA, and 5 mg/kg of ovalbumin + FCA (positive control) 3 times a week for three weeks. Fourteen days after the last sensi‑ tization, animals were challenged intravenously weekly for two weeks. Hematological and histopathological analyses were performed and compared to control groups. Results: In the ASA test, all lac color groups showed mild symptoms such as nose rubbing, urination, and evacuation, which are insufficient indicators of anaphylaxis. Exploratory studies identified several biomarkers: decreased platelet count, and increased basophil count; distention in the lung, and redness on the inner wall of trachea; mononuclear inflammatory cell infiltration (MICI) in the ear, and heart hemorrhage. When these biomarkers were applied to the ASA test of lac color, in comparison to the negative control group, the positive control group (ovalbumin + FCA) showed a significant over 60-fold reduction in platelet count and nearly threefold higher basophil count compared to other groups. Furthermore, only positive control group exhibited full lung distention and severe redness on the inner wall of the trachea. Mononuclear inflammatory cell infiltration (MICI) in the ear was about three times higher, and heart hemorrhage was only present in the positive control group compared to others. None of the lac color groups were different from the negative control group (p > 0.05), whereas the positive control group was significantly different (p < 0.05). Conclusions Our study concludes that lac color, at the tested concentrations, does not induce antigenicity in the guinea pig model, providing valuable safety data. Furthermore, the biomarkers identified in this study offer a supportive approach to evaluating the immunogenicity of substances in future research.

Background: Genetically immunodeficient mice lacking Il2rg and Rag2 genes have been widely utilized in the field of biomedical research. However, immunodeficient rats, which offer the advantage of larger size, have not been as extensively used to date. Recently, Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) rats were generated using CRISPR/ Cas9 system, targeting Il2rg and Rag2 in National BioResource Project in Japan. We imported and investigated more detailed phenotypes of wild-type (WT) Il2rg knockout (KO), Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats for 20 weeks. Results: During experiments, Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats showed decreased white blood cells and sys‑ temic lymphopenia, with reduced CD4+, CD8+ T cells and CD161+ NK cells. Additionally, all KO strains exhibited reduced relative spleen weights, hypoplasia of the germinal center in the white pulp, and atrophy with the disap‑ pearance of the boundary between the cortex and medulla in the thymus, compared to WT rats. Furthermore, we established human acute lymphoblastic leukemia xenograft rat model by intravenously injecting 5.0 × ­106 cells/kg of NALM6 cells into Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats. Conclusions These findings indicate that Il2rg KO, Rag2 KO, and Il2rg/Rag2 KO rats exhibited SCID phenotypes, sug‑ gesting their potential application as immunodeficient animal models for tumor xenograft studies.