Background: Achieving optimal glucose control is essential in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral quadruple combination therapy for the treatment of T2D. Methods: This meta-analysis reviewed original research on oral quadruple combination therapy for T2D, including both experimental and observational studies with a minimum duration of 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to follow-up. The secondary endpoint was the incidence rate of adverse events. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes were pooled as the standardized mean difference (using Hedge’s g) and the risk ratio for adverse events in random-effects meta-analyses. Results: The meta-analysis included 17 studies. Oral quadruple combination therapy resulted in an additional mean reduction in HbA1c levels of 1.1% in patients who did not achieve glycemic control with oral triple combination therapy. Compared with switching to injectables, such as insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist–containing regimen, this therapy was non-inferior, even demonstrating a slightly superior glucose-lowering effect. Furthermore, it was determined to be safe, with an adverse event rate of 0.25, indicating no significant difference in safety compared with adding a placebo or switching to an injectable-containing regimen. Conclusion Oral quadruple combination therapy is a valid option for patients with T2D who are unable to achieve glycemic targets with oral triple combination therapy, offering both effective glycemic control and a favorable safety profile.

Purpose: We used bioinformatics methods and Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the hub genes involved in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and their causal relationship with hemolysis, to explore a new direction for molecular biology research of AML. Methods: We first differentially analyzed peripheral blood samples from 62 healthy volunteers and 65 patients with AML from the Gene Expression Omnibus database to obtain differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and intersected them with genes sourced from weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and the GeneCards database to obtain target genes. Target genes were screened using protein–protein interaction (PPI) network analysis and ROC curves to identify genes associated with AML. Finally, we analyzed the correlation between genes and immune cells and the relationship between toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) and AML using MR. Results: We compared peripheral blood expression profiles using an array of 62 healthy volunteers (GSE164191) and 65 patients with AML (GSE89565) (M0:25; M1:11; M2:10; M3:1; M4:7; M4 eo t [16;16] ou inv [16]:4; M5:6; M6:1) and obtained 7,339 DEGs (3,733 upregulated and 3,606 downregulated). We intersected these DEGs with 4,724 genes from WGCNA and 1,330 genes related to hemolysis that were identified in the GeneCards database to obtain 190 target genes. After further screening these genes using the PPI network, we identified TLR4, PTPRC, FCGR3B, STAT1, and APOE, which are closely associated with hemolysis in patients with AML. Finally, we found a causal relationship between TLR4 and AML occurrence using MR analysis (p < 0.05). Conclusion We constructed a WGCNA-based co-expression network and identified hemolysis-associated AML genes.

Background: Achieving optimal glucose control is essential in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral quadruple combination therapy for the treatment of T2D. Methods: This meta-analysis reviewed original research on oral quadruple combination therapy for T2D, including both experimental and observational studies with a minimum duration of 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to follow-up. The secondary endpoint was the incidence rate of adverse events. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes were pooled as the standardized mean difference (using Hedge’s g) and the risk ratio for adverse events in random-effects meta-analyses. Results: The meta-analysis included 17 studies. Oral quadruple combination therapy resulted in an additional mean reduction in HbA1c levels of 1.1% in patients who did not achieve glycemic control with oral triple combination therapy. Compared with switching to injectables, such as insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist–containing regimen, this therapy was non-inferior, even demonstrating a slightly superior glucose-lowering effect. Furthermore, it was determined to be safe, with an adverse event rate of 0.25, indicating no significant difference in safety compared with adding a placebo or switching to an injectable-containing regimen. Conclusion Oral quadruple combination therapy is a valid option for patients with T2D who are unable to achieve glycemic targets with oral triple combination therapy, offering both effective glycemic control and a favorable safety profile.

Purpose: We used bioinformatics methods and Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the hub genes involved in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and their causal relationship with hemolysis, to explore a new direction for molecular biology research of AML. Methods: We first differentially analyzed peripheral blood samples from 62 healthy volunteers and 65 patients with AML from the Gene Expression Omnibus database to obtain differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and intersected them with genes sourced from weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and the GeneCards database to obtain target genes. Target genes were screened using protein–protein interaction (PPI) network analysis and ROC curves to identify genes associated with AML. Finally, we analyzed the correlation between genes and immune cells and the relationship between toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) and AML using MR. Results: We compared peripheral blood expression profiles using an array of 62 healthy volunteers (GSE164191) and 65 patients with AML (GSE89565) (M0:25; M1:11; M2:10; M3:1; M4:7; M4 eo t [16;16] ou inv [16]:4; M5:6; M6:1) and obtained 7,339 DEGs (3,733 upregulated and 3,606 downregulated). We intersected these DEGs with 4,724 genes from WGCNA and 1,330 genes related to hemolysis that were identified in the GeneCards database to obtain 190 target genes. After further screening these genes using the PPI network, we identified TLR4, PTPRC, FCGR3B, STAT1, and APOE, which are closely associated with hemolysis in patients with AML. Finally, we found a causal relationship between TLR4 and AML occurrence using MR analysis (p < 0.05). Conclusion We constructed a WGCNA-based co-expression network and identified hemolysis-associated AML genes.

Background: Achieving optimal glucose control is essential in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral quadruple combination therapy for the treatment of T2D. Methods: This meta-analysis reviewed original research on oral quadruple combination therapy for T2D, including both experimental and observational studies with a minimum duration of 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to follow-up. The secondary endpoint was the incidence rate of adverse events. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes were pooled as the standardized mean difference (using Hedge’s g) and the risk ratio for adverse events in random-effects meta-analyses. Results: The meta-analysis included 17 studies. Oral quadruple combination therapy resulted in an additional mean reduction in HbA1c levels of 1.1% in patients who did not achieve glycemic control with oral triple combination therapy. Compared with switching to injectables, such as insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist–containing regimen, this therapy was non-inferior, even demonstrating a slightly superior glucose-lowering effect. Furthermore, it was determined to be safe, with an adverse event rate of 0.25, indicating no significant difference in safety compared with adding a placebo or switching to an injectable-containing regimen. Conclusion Oral quadruple combination therapy is a valid option for patients with T2D who are unable to achieve glycemic targets with oral triple combination therapy, offering both effective glycemic control and a favorable safety profile.

Purpose: We used bioinformatics methods and Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the hub genes involved in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and their causal relationship with hemolysis, to explore a new direction for molecular biology research of AML. Methods: We first differentially analyzed peripheral blood samples from 62 healthy volunteers and 65 patients with AML from the Gene Expression Omnibus database to obtain differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and intersected them with genes sourced from weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) and the GeneCards database to obtain target genes. Target genes were screened using protein–protein interaction (PPI) network analysis and ROC curves to identify genes associated with AML. Finally, we analyzed the correlation between genes and immune cells and the relationship between toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) and AML using MR. Results: We compared peripheral blood expression profiles using an array of 62 healthy volunteers (GSE164191) and 65 patients with AML (GSE89565) (M0:25; M1:11; M2:10; M3:1; M4:7; M4 eo t [16;16] ou inv [16]:4; M5:6; M6:1) and obtained 7,339 DEGs (3,733 upregulated and 3,606 downregulated). We intersected these DEGs with 4,724 genes from WGCNA and 1,330 genes related to hemolysis that were identified in the GeneCards database to obtain 190 target genes. After further screening these genes using the PPI network, we identified TLR4, PTPRC, FCGR3B, STAT1, and APOE, which are closely associated with hemolysis in patients with AML. Finally, we found a causal relationship between TLR4 and AML occurrence using MR analysis (p < 0.05). Conclusion We constructed a WGCNA-based co-expression network and identified hemolysis-associated AML genes.

Background: Achieving optimal glucose control is essential in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oral quadruple combination therapy for the treatment of T2D. Methods: This meta-analysis reviewed original research on oral quadruple combination therapy for T2D, including both experimental and observational studies with a minimum duration of 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to follow-up. The secondary endpoint was the incidence rate of adverse events. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes were pooled as the standardized mean difference (using Hedge’s g) and the risk ratio for adverse events in random-effects meta-analyses. Results: The meta-analysis included 17 studies. Oral quadruple combination therapy resulted in an additional mean reduction in HbA1c levels of 1.1% in patients who did not achieve glycemic control with oral triple combination therapy. Compared with switching to injectables, such as insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist–containing regimen, this therapy was non-inferior, even demonstrating a slightly superior glucose-lowering effect. Furthermore, it was determined to be safe, with an adverse event rate of 0.25, indicating no significant difference in safety compared with adding a placebo or switching to an injectable-containing regimen. Conclusion Oral quadruple combination therapy is a valid option for patients with T2D who are unable to achieve glycemic targets with oral triple combination therapy, offering both effective glycemic control and a favorable safety profile.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.