Correction to: Short-Term Symptomatic Relief in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Comparative Study of Esomeprazole and Vonoprazan.

The original version of the article unfortunately contained percentage errors in second and third paragraphs of GerdQ Score section. Below is the corrected version.

Short-Term Symptomatic Relief in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Comparative Study of Esomeprazole and Vonoprazan.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan (a potassium-competitive acid blocker) are recommended as first-line treatments for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, few reports have investigated the onset of action of these agents for GERD symptom relief. The present study compared the symptom relief of esomeprazole with that of vonoprazan via monitoring self-reported GERD symptoms after treatment initiation. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel group, comparative clinical study between esomeprazole (20 mg/day) and vonoprazan (20 mg/day) administered for 4 weeks to patients with GERD symptoms. Patients who had scores ≥ 8 on the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GerdQ) were defined as having GERD and enrolled in this study. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to either the esomeprazole group (n = 30) or the vonoprazan group (n = 30). Treatment response rates in each drug group were evaluated according to the GerdQ. The Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD (FSSG) scores from the 1st day after treatment initiation and the Global Overall Symptom (GOS) scale scores during treatment were also evaluated. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, the treatment response rates for symptom relief according to the GerdQ were 88.0% in the esomeprazole group and 81.8% in the vonoprazan group. The GOS scales, which reflect the impact of GERD symptoms, were similar for both groups. The FSSG scores decreased from the 1st to the 14th day in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: There were no substantial differences in the symptom relief between the two groups at any time point in this short-term study.

Evaluation of sorafenib treatment and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative study using the propensity score matching method.

While sorafenib (SFN) is the established worldwide standard therapeutic agent for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) is also considered a favorable treatment for some advanced HCCs. This study aimed to evaluate each treatment and provide an optimal therapeutic choice for advanced HCCs. We analyzed 72 patients treated with SFN and 128 patients receiving HAIC. Both treatment groups were analyzed for prognostic and disease progression factors, and matched pair analysis was performed using the propensity score matching method. The preferable status of intrahepatic lesions, that is, no lesions or only a single (< 3 cm) intrahepetic lesion, was positively associated with good prognosis and negatively associated with disease progression in the SFN group. Maximum tumor size (> 5 cm) and low albumin (≤ 3.4 g/dL) were poor prognostic and disease progression factors in the HAIC group. Analysis of 53 patients selected from each of the SFN and HAIC groups based on the propensity score matching method showed no significant differences in survival or disease progression between the two matched subgroups. On the other hand, progression-free survival (PFS) in the HAIC-matched subgroup was significantly longer than in the SFN-matched subgroup, particularly in patients with portal vein invasion (PVI) and/or without extrahepatic spread (EHS). The treatment efficacy of HAIC is similar to that of SFN regarding survival and disease progression. Longer PFS might be expected for HAIC compared with SFN, particularly in patients with PVI and/or without EHS.

Micafungin-induced immune hemolysis attacks.

The echinocandins provide an attractive new option for prophylactic and empirical treatment of invasive fungal infections in patients with neutropenia after intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. We present two patients with hematological diseases who experienced massive intravascular hemolysis followed by renal failure after administration of micafungin. In indirect antiglobulin test, significant agglutination was observed when red blood cells were exposed to the mixture of micafungin and either of the patients' plasma samples, indicating that production of antibodies directed against both micafungin and red blood cell membrane induced hemolysis attack. Micafungin-mediated immune hemolysis represents an uncommon but life-threatening adverse reaction leading to renal failure.