Background: Various molecular methods are used to rapidly detect gastrointestinal pathogens, highlighting the importance of understanding the performance of the associated kits in detail. We comprehensively assessed the performance of Kogene PowerChek multiplex real-time PCR kits (PowerChek Bacterial/Viral Kits) with the FilmArray GI Panel. Methods: Residual stool specimens (N = 246), initially tested utilizing the FilmArray GI Panel (May 2023–Jan 2024), were reanalyzed using PowerChek Bacterial/Viral Kits. Discrepancies were resolved by performing additional molecular assays and reviewing culture results when available. True positives (TPs)/true negatives were defined by concordant results in at least two assays. We determined cycle threshold (Ct)/crossing point (Cp) distributions between the TP and false positive (FP) groups and analyzed melting curves for the FilmArray GI Panel FPs. Results: The positive-percent agreement (PPA) of the PowerChek Bacterial/Viral Kits was 50–100%, with lower values for Salmonella spp., rotavirus, and astrovirus, whereas the FilmArray GI Panel showed 100% PPA across all targets. Both platforms demonstrated > 99% negative-percent agreement, except for enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) and adenovirus (PowerChek Bacterial/Viral Kits) or EPEC, enteroaggregative E. coli, norovirus, and Salmonella spp. (FilmArray GI Panel). The FPs showed higher Ct/Cp values with both kits, and these values were significantly higher for adenovirus (PowerChek Viral Kit), EPEC, and norovirus (FilmArray GI Panel). Melting curve analysis of four norovirus FPs (FilmArray GI Panel) revealed atypical patterns in three cases. Conclusions The FilmArray GI Panel demonstrated higher sensitivity than the PowerChek Kits. For norovirus, melting curve analysis will help avoid FPs.

Vancomycin variable Enterococcus (VVE) bacteria are phenotypically susceptible to vancomycin, but they harbor the vanA gene. We aimed to ascertain the prevalence of VVE among clinically isolated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) isolates, as well as elucidate the molecular characteristics of the vanA gene cluster within these isolates. Notably, we investigated the prevalence and structure of the vanA gene cluster of VVE. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we collected consecutive, non-duplicated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) samples. Real-time PCR was performed to detect the presence of vanA, vanB, and vanC. Overlapping PCR with sequencing and whole -genome sequencing were performed for structural analysis. Sequence types (STs) were determined by multilocus sequence typing. Exposure testing was performed to assess the ability of the isolates to acquire vancomycin resistance. Among 282 VSE isolates tested, 20 isolates (7.1%) were VVE. Among them, 17 isolates had partial deletions in the IS1216 or IS1542 sequences in vanS (N = 10), vanR (N = 5), or vanH (N = 2). All VVE isolates belonged to the CC17 complex and comprised five STs, namely ST17 (40.0%), ST1421 (25.0%), ST80 (25.0%), ST787 (5.0%), and ST981 (5.0%). Most isolates were related to three hospital-associated clones (ST17, ST1421, and ST80). After vancomycin exposure, 18 of the 20 VVEs acquired vancomycin resistance. Considering the high reversion rate, detecting VVE by screening VSE for vanA is critical for appropriate treatment and infection control.

Vancomycin variable Enterococcus (VVE) bacteria are phenotypically susceptible to vancomycin, but they harbor the vanA gene. We aimed to ascertain the prevalence of VVE among clinically isolated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) isolates, as well as elucidate the molecular characteristics of the vanA gene cluster within these isolates. Notably, we investigated the prevalence and structure of the vanA gene cluster of VVE. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we collected consecutive, non-duplicated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) samples. Real-time PCR was performed to detect the presence of vanA, vanB, and vanC. Overlapping PCR with sequencing and whole -genome sequencing were performed for structural analysis. Sequence types (STs) were determined by multilocus sequence typing. Exposure testing was performed to assess the ability of the isolates to acquire vancomycin resistance. Among 282 VSE isolates tested, 20 isolates (7.1%) were VVE. Among them, 17 isolates had partial deletions in the IS1216 or IS1542 sequences in vanS (N = 10), vanR (N = 5), or vanH (N = 2). All VVE isolates belonged to the CC17 complex and comprised five STs, namely ST17 (40.0%), ST1421 (25.0%), ST80 (25.0%), ST787 (5.0%), and ST981 (5.0%). Most isolates were related to three hospital-associated clones (ST17, ST1421, and ST80). After vancomycin exposure, 18 of the 20 VVEs acquired vancomycin resistance. Considering the high reversion rate, detecting VVE by screening VSE for vanA is critical for appropriate treatment and infection control.

Vancomycin variable Enterococcus (VVE) bacteria are phenotypically susceptible to vancomycin, but they harbor the vanA gene. We aimed to ascertain the prevalence of VVE among clinically isolated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) isolates, as well as elucidate the molecular characteristics of the vanA gene cluster within these isolates. Notably, we investigated the prevalence and structure of the vanA gene cluster of VVE. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we collected consecutive, non-duplicated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) samples. Real-time PCR was performed to detect the presence of vanA, vanB, and vanC. Overlapping PCR with sequencing and whole -genome sequencing were performed for structural analysis. Sequence types (STs) were determined by multilocus sequence typing. Exposure testing was performed to assess the ability of the isolates to acquire vancomycin resistance. Among 282 VSE isolates tested, 20 isolates (7.1%) were VVE. Among them, 17 isolates had partial deletions in the IS1216 or IS1542 sequences in vanS (N = 10), vanR (N = 5), or vanH (N = 2). All VVE isolates belonged to the CC17 complex and comprised five STs, namely ST17 (40.0%), ST1421 (25.0%), ST80 (25.0%), ST787 (5.0%), and ST981 (5.0%). Most isolates were related to three hospital-associated clones (ST17, ST1421, and ST80). After vancomycin exposure, 18 of the 20 VVEs acquired vancomycin resistance. Considering the high reversion rate, detecting VVE by screening VSE for vanA is critical for appropriate treatment and infection control.

Vancomycin variable Enterococcus (VVE) bacteria are phenotypically susceptible to vancomycin, but they harbor the vanA gene. We aimed to ascertain the prevalence of VVE among clinically isolated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) isolates, as well as elucidate the molecular characteristics of the vanA gene cluster within these isolates. Notably, we investigated the prevalence and structure of the vanA gene cluster of VVE. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we collected consecutive, non-duplicated vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (VSE) samples. Real-time PCR was performed to detect the presence of vanA, vanB, and vanC. Overlapping PCR with sequencing and whole -genome sequencing were performed for structural analysis. Sequence types (STs) were determined by multilocus sequence typing. Exposure testing was performed to assess the ability of the isolates to acquire vancomycin resistance. Among 282 VSE isolates tested, 20 isolates (7.1%) were VVE. Among them, 17 isolates had partial deletions in the IS1216 or IS1542 sequences in vanS (N = 10), vanR (N = 5), or vanH (N = 2). All VVE isolates belonged to the CC17 complex and comprised five STs, namely ST17 (40.0%), ST1421 (25.0%), ST80 (25.0%), ST787 (5.0%), and ST981 (5.0%). Most isolates were related to three hospital-associated clones (ST17, ST1421, and ST80). After vancomycin exposure, 18 of the 20 VVEs acquired vancomycin resistance. Considering the high reversion rate, detecting VVE by screening VSE for vanA is critical for appropriate treatment and infection control.

In this paper, we review the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies, focusing on primary and metastatic liver cancer, and recurrent rectal cancer. Technological advancements in radiotherapy have facilitated the direct delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors, while limiting normal tissue exposure, supporting the use of hypofractionation. Hypofractionated radiotherapy is particularly effective for primary and metastatic liver cancer where high-dose irradiation is crucial to achieve effective local control. For recurrent rectal cancer, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy offers a promising approach for re-irradiation, balancing efficacy and safety in patients who have been administered previous pelvic radiotherapy and in whom salvage surgery is not applicable. Nevertheless, the potential for radiation-induced liver disease and gastrointestinal complications presents challenges when applying hypofractionation to gastrointestinal organs. Given the lack of universal consensus on hypofractionation regimens and the dose constraints for primary and metastatic liver cancer, as well as for recurrent rectal cancer, this review aims to facilitate clinical decision-making by pointing to potential regimens and dose constraints, underpinned by a comprehensive review of existing clinical studies and guidelines.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) has become a trend in the modern era, as advances in RT techniques, including intensity-modulated RT and image-guided RT, enable the precise and safe delivery of high-dose radiation. Hypofractionated RT offers convenience and can reduce the financial burden on patients by decreasing the number of fractions. Furthermore, hypofractionated RT is potentially more beneficial for tumors with a low α/β ratio compared with conventional fractionation RT. Therefore, hypofractionated RT has been investigated for various primary cancers and has gained status as a standard treatment recommended in the guidelines. In genitourinary (GU) cancer, especially prostate cancer, the efficacy, and safety of various hypofractionated dose schemes have been evaluated in numerous prospective clinical studies, establishing the standard hypofractionated RT regimen. Hypofractionated RT has also been explored for gynecological (GY) cancer, yielding relevant evidence in recent years. In this review, we aimed to summarize the representative evidence and current trends in clinical studies on hypofractionated RT for GU and GY cancers addressing several key questions. In addition, the objective is to offer suggestions for the available dose regimens for hypofractionated RT by reviewing protocols from previous clinical studies.

Aging is a risk factor for development of chronic kidney disease and diabetes mellitus with commonly shared features of chronic inflammation and increased oxidative stress. Here, we investigated the effect of pan-Nox-inhibitor, APX-115, on renal function in aging diabetic mice. Methods: Diabetes was induced by intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin at 50 mg/kg/day for 5 days in 52-week-old C57BL/6J mice. APX-115 was administered by oral gavage at a dose of 60 mg/kg/day for 12 weeks in nondiabetic and diabetic aging mice. Results: APX-115 significantly improved insulin resistance in diabetic aging mice. Urinary level of 8-isoprostane was significantly increased in diabetic aging mice than nondiabetic aging mice, and APX-115 treatment reduced 8-isoprostane level. Urinary albumin and nephrin excretion were significantly higher in diabetic aging mice than nondiabetic aging mice. Although APX-115 did not significantly decrease albuminuria, APX-115 markedly improved mesangial expansion, macrophage infiltration, and expression of fibrosis molecules such as transforming growth factor beta 1 and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. Interestingly, the expression of all Nox isoforms including Nox1, Nox2, and Nox4 was significantly increased in diabetic aging kidneys, and APX-115 treatment decreased Nox1, Nox2, and Nox4 protein expression in the kidney. Furthermore, Klotho expression was significantly decreased in diabetic aging kidneys, and APX-115 restored Klotho level. Conclusion: Our results provide evidence that pan-Nox inhibition may improve systemic insulin resistance and decrease oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis in aging diabetic status and may have potential protective effects on aging diabetic kidney.

In this paper, we review the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies, focusing on primary and metastatic liver cancer, and recurrent rectal cancer. Technological advancements in radiotherapy have facilitated the direct delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors, while limiting normal tissue exposure, supporting the use of hypofractionation. Hypofractionated radiotherapy is particularly effective for primary and metastatic liver cancer where high-dose irradiation is crucial to achieve effective local control. For recurrent rectal cancer, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy offers a promising approach for re-irradiation, balancing efficacy and safety in patients who have been administered previous pelvic radiotherapy and in whom salvage surgery is not applicable. Nevertheless, the potential for radiation-induced liver disease and gastrointestinal complications presents challenges when applying hypofractionation to gastrointestinal organs. Given the lack of universal consensus on hypofractionation regimens and the dose constraints for primary and metastatic liver cancer, as well as for recurrent rectal cancer, this review aims to facilitate clinical decision-making by pointing to potential regimens and dose constraints, underpinned by a comprehensive review of existing clinical studies and guidelines.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) has become a trend in the modern era, as advances in RT techniques, including intensity-modulated RT and image-guided RT, enable the precise and safe delivery of high-dose radiation. Hypofractionated RT offers convenience and can reduce the financial burden on patients by decreasing the number of fractions. Furthermore, hypofractionated RT is potentially more beneficial for tumors with a low α/β ratio compared with conventional fractionation RT. Therefore, hypofractionated RT has been investigated for various primary cancers and has gained status as a standard treatment recommended in the guidelines. In genitourinary (GU) cancer, especially prostate cancer, the efficacy, and safety of various hypofractionated dose schemes have been evaluated in numerous prospective clinical studies, establishing the standard hypofractionated RT regimen. Hypofractionated RT has also been explored for gynecological (GY) cancer, yielding relevant evidence in recent years. In this review, we aimed to summarize the representative evidence and current trends in clinical studies on hypofractionated RT for GU and GY cancers addressing several key questions. In addition, the objective is to offer suggestions for the available dose regimens for hypofractionated RT by reviewing protocols from previous clinical studies.