OBJECTIVES: Exposure to humidifier disinfectants has been linked to respiratory diseases, including interstitial lung disease, asthma, and pneumonia. Consequently, numerous toxicological studies have explored respiratory damage as both a necessary and sufficient condition for these diseases. We systematically reviewed and integrated evidence from toxicological studies by applying the evidence integration method established in previous research to confirm the biological plausibility of the association between exposure and disease. METHODS: We conducted a literature search focusing on polyhexamethylene guanidine phosphate (PHMG) and chloromethylisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (CMIT/MIT), the primary ingredients in humidifier disinfectants. We selected relevant studies based on their quality and the population, exposure, comparator, outcome (PECO) statements. These studies were categorized into three lines of evidence: hazard information, animal studies, and mechanistic studies. Based on a systematic review, we integrated the evidence to develop an aggregate exposure pathway–adverse outcome pathway (AEP-AOP) model for respiratory damage. The reliability and relevance of our findings were assessed by comparing them with the hypothesized pathogenic mechanisms of respiratory diseases. RESULTS: By integrating toxicological evidence for each component of the AEP-AOP framework for PHMG and CMIT/MIT, we developed an AEP-AOP model that elucidates how disinfectants released from humidifiers expose target sites, triggering molecular initiating events and key events that ultimately lead to respiratory damage. This model exhibits high reliability and relevance to the pathogenesis of respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS The AEP-AOP model developed in this study provides strong evidence, based on evidence-based toxicology, that exposure to humidifier disinfectants causes respiratory diseases. This model demonstrates the pathways leading to respiratory damage, a hallmark of these conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Exposure to humidifier disinfectants has been linked to respiratory diseases, including interstitial lung disease, asthma, and pneumonia. Consequently, numerous toxicological studies have explored respiratory damage as both a necessary and sufficient condition for these diseases. We systematically reviewed and integrated evidence from toxicological studies by applying the evidence integration method established in previous research to confirm the biological plausibility of the association between exposure and disease. METHODS: We conducted a literature search focusing on polyhexamethylene guanidine phosphate (PHMG) and chloromethylisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (CMIT/MIT), the primary ingredients in humidifier disinfectants. We selected relevant studies based on their quality and the population, exposure, comparator, outcome (PECO) statements. These studies were categorized into three lines of evidence: hazard information, animal studies, and mechanistic studies. Based on a systematic review, we integrated the evidence to develop an aggregate exposure pathway–adverse outcome pathway (AEP-AOP) model for respiratory damage. The reliability and relevance of our findings were assessed by comparing them with the hypothesized pathogenic mechanisms of respiratory diseases. RESULTS: By integrating toxicological evidence for each component of the AEP-AOP framework for PHMG and CMIT/MIT, we developed an AEP-AOP model that elucidates how disinfectants released from humidifiers expose target sites, triggering molecular initiating events and key events that ultimately lead to respiratory damage. This model exhibits high reliability and relevance to the pathogenesis of respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS The AEP-AOP model developed in this study provides strong evidence, based on evidence-based toxicology, that exposure to humidifier disinfectants causes respiratory diseases. This model demonstrates the pathways leading to respiratory damage, a hallmark of these conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Exposure to humidifier disinfectants has been linked to respiratory diseases, including interstitial lung disease, asthma, and pneumonia. Consequently, numerous toxicological studies have explored respiratory damage as both a necessary and sufficient condition for these diseases. We systematically reviewed and integrated evidence from toxicological studies by applying the evidence integration method established in previous research to confirm the biological plausibility of the association between exposure and disease. METHODS: We conducted a literature search focusing on polyhexamethylene guanidine phosphate (PHMG) and chloromethylisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (CMIT/MIT), the primary ingredients in humidifier disinfectants. We selected relevant studies based on their quality and the population, exposure, comparator, outcome (PECO) statements. These studies were categorized into three lines of evidence: hazard information, animal studies, and mechanistic studies. Based on a systematic review, we integrated the evidence to develop an aggregate exposure pathway–adverse outcome pathway (AEP-AOP) model for respiratory damage. The reliability and relevance of our findings were assessed by comparing them with the hypothesized pathogenic mechanisms of respiratory diseases. RESULTS: By integrating toxicological evidence for each component of the AEP-AOP framework for PHMG and CMIT/MIT, we developed an AEP-AOP model that elucidates how disinfectants released from humidifiers expose target sites, triggering molecular initiating events and key events that ultimately lead to respiratory damage. This model exhibits high reliability and relevance to the pathogenesis of respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS The AEP-AOP model developed in this study provides strong evidence, based on evidence-based toxicology, that exposure to humidifier disinfectants causes respiratory diseases. This model demonstrates the pathways leading to respiratory damage, a hallmark of these conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Exposure to humidifier disinfectants has been linked to respiratory diseases, including interstitial lung disease, asthma, and pneumonia. Consequently, numerous toxicological studies have explored respiratory damage as both a necessary and sufficient condition for these diseases. We systematically reviewed and integrated evidence from toxicological studies by applying the evidence integration method established in previous research to confirm the biological plausibility of the association between exposure and disease. METHODS: We conducted a literature search focusing on polyhexamethylene guanidine phosphate (PHMG) and chloromethylisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (CMIT/MIT), the primary ingredients in humidifier disinfectants. We selected relevant studies based on their quality and the population, exposure, comparator, outcome (PECO) statements. These studies were categorized into three lines of evidence: hazard information, animal studies, and mechanistic studies. Based on a systematic review, we integrated the evidence to develop an aggregate exposure pathway–adverse outcome pathway (AEP-AOP) model for respiratory damage. The reliability and relevance of our findings were assessed by comparing them with the hypothesized pathogenic mechanisms of respiratory diseases. RESULTS: By integrating toxicological evidence for each component of the AEP-AOP framework for PHMG and CMIT/MIT, we developed an AEP-AOP model that elucidates how disinfectants released from humidifiers expose target sites, triggering molecular initiating events and key events that ultimately lead to respiratory damage. This model exhibits high reliability and relevance to the pathogenesis of respiratory diseases. CONCLUSIONS The AEP-AOP model developed in this study provides strong evidence, based on evidence-based toxicology, that exposure to humidifier disinfectants causes respiratory diseases. This model demonstrates the pathways leading to respiratory damage, a hallmark of these conditions.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in Asian men with all stages of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: READT (real-life evaluation of the effect of ADT in prostate cancer patients in Asia) was a multi-center, prospective observational study involving six sites across four Asian populations. We enrolled eligible prostate cancer patients, who opted for ADT alone or in combination without prior neoadjuvant or adjuvant ADT within 12 months. The EuroQoL-5 dimensions, 5 level scale (EQ-5D-5L) utility index scores and visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated at baseline, month 6 and month 12. Results: A total of 504 patients were recruited into READT between September 2016 and May 2020 with 52.9% diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. The EQ-5D-5L was evaluable in 442/504 (87.7%) of patients. Overall baseline EQ-5D-5L utility index score was 0.924 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.876–1.000). We observed a statistically significant difference in baseline EQ-5D-5L utility index score among different populations with a median EQ-5D-5L utility index score of 1 for Taiwan & Hong Kong, 0.897 for China and 0.838 for Malaysia. Similar trend was observed throughout multiple treatment time-points. Stage IV prostate cancer were significantly associated with a lower baseline EQ-5D-5L utility index score compared to stage I–III prostate cancer, producing a median disutility value of -0.080. Participants had a high median VAS (80, IQR 70–90), indicating good overall health on average during ADT initiation. Conclusions The study highlights the differences in health state utility index scores among various Asian prostate cancer patients receiving ADT at real-world setting. Our findings will be informative and useful in cost-effectiveness evaluation and policy decision making.

Despite the availability of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Korea, need remains for pangenotypic regimens that can be used in the presence of hepatic impairment, comorbidities, or prior treatment failure. We investigated the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir for 12 weeks in HCV-infected Korean adults. Methods: This Phase 3b, multicenter, open-label study included 2 cohorts. In Cohort 1, participants with HCV genotype 1 or 2 and who were treatment-naive or treatment-experienced with interferon-based treatments, received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir 400/100 mg/day. In Cohort 2, HCV genotype 1 infected individuals who previously received an NS5A inhibitor-containing regimen ≥ 4 weeks received sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir 400/100/100 mg/day. Decompensated cirrhosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary endpoint was SVR12, defined as HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL 12 weeks following treatment. Results: Of 53 participants receiving sofosbuvir–velpatasvir, 52 (98.1%) achieved SVR12. The single participant who did not achieve SVR12 experienced an asymptomatic Grade 3 ASL/ALT elevation on day 15 and discontinued treatment. The event resolved without intervention. All 33 participants (100%) treated with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir achieved SVR 12. Overall, sofosbuvir–velpatasvir and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir were safe and well tolerated. Three participants (5.6%) in Cohort 1 and 1 participant (3.0%) in Cohort 2 had serious adverse events, but none were considered treatment-related. No deaths or grade 4 laboratory abnormalities were reported. Conclusions: Treatment with sofosbuvir–velpatasvir or sofosbuvir–velpatasvir–voxilaprevir was safe and resulted in high SVR12 rates in Korean HCV patients.

Cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen 21-1 (CYFRA 21-1) is useful for predicting and monitoring non-small cell lung cancer prognosis. We established reference intervals (RIs) of CYFRA 21-1 in Korean adults, including those older than 60 years. Data of 4,098 apparently healthy subjects (age range, 20–87 years) were analyzed after excluding those with a history of malignancy, high tumor marker concentrations (except CYFRA 21-1), and/or abnormal findings on a chest computed tomography scan through medical chart review. After removing two outliers, RIs of CYFRA 21-1 were determined using data of 4,096 subjects based on the non-parametric method (2.5th and 97.5th percentiles) according to CLSI guidelines EP28-A3c. The subjects were divided into two and four groups according to sex and age (20–40, 41–50, 51–60, and >60 years), respectively, and the median CYFRA 21-1 concentration was compared between the groups. The RI of CYFRA 21-1 was 0.66–3.84 ng/mL, applicable to both men and women. Regardless of sex, the CYFRA 21-1 concentration increased with age, suggesting that age-dependent RIs of CYFRA 21-1 should be applied. Rather than using a single RI provided by the manufacturer, the RI of CYFRA 21-1 should be continually verified and established in each clinical laboratory.

OBJECTIVES: Inhalation exposure to humidifier disinfectants has resulted to various types of health damages in Korea. To determine the epidemiological correlation necessary for presuming the legal causation, we aimed to develop a method to synthesize the entire evidence. METHODS: Epidemiological and toxicological studies are systematically reviewed. Target health problems are selected by criteria such as frequent complaints of claimants. Relevant epidemiologic studies are reviewed and the risk of bias and confidence level of the total evidence are evaluated. Toxicological literature reviews are conducted on three lines of evidence including hazard information, animal studies, and mechanistic studies, considering the source-to-exposure-to-outcome continuum. The confidence level of the body of evidence is then translated into the toxicological evidence levels for the causality between humidifier disinfectant exposure and health effects. Finally, the levels of epidemiological and toxicological evidence are synthesized. RESULTS: Under the Special Act revised in 2020, if the history of exposure and the disease occurred/worsened after exposure were approved, and the epidemiological correlation between the exposure and disease was verified, the legal causation is presumed unless the company proves the evidence against it. The epidemiological correlation can be verified through epidemiological investigations, health monitoring, cohort investigations and/or toxicological studies. It is not simply as statistical association as understood in judicial precedents, but a general causation established by the evidence as a whole, i.e., through weight-of-the-evidence approach. CONCLUSIONS The weight-of-the-evidence approach differs from the conclusive single study approach and this systematic evidence integration can be used in presumption of causation.