Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are an important treatment option for ulcerative colitis, providing rapid onset of action, oral administration, and efficacy even after biologic failure. The 3 approved agents—tofacitinib, filgotinib, and upadacitinib—differ in JAK isoform selectivity, leading to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety. Evidence from network meta-analyses, clinical trials, and real-world studies consistently shows that upadacitinib provides the highest efficacy for induction and maintenance of remission, whereas filgotinib demonstrates the most favorable safety profile. The strong efficacy of upadacitinib and tofacitinib is particularly relevant in patients with severe disease, including acute severe ulcerative colitis, and upadacitinib maintains high efficacy regardless of prior advanced therapy exposure. JAK inhibitors also benefit extraintestinal manifestations. Although risks such as herpes zoster, serious infection, thromboembolism, and major cardiovascular events differ among agents, long-term data suggest generally acceptable safety when used appropriately. Intraclass JAK-to-JAK cycling is feasible, with about half of patients achieving steroid-free clinical remission in retrospective cohorts. Based on mechanistic, clinical, and real-world evidence, filgotinib may be a first-line option for patients with lower disease activity or when safety is a priority, whereas upadacitinib or tofacitinib may be preferred in higher disease activity. Strategically selecting agents may improve durability and outcomes.

Rectal cancer, which accounts for approximately 40% of colorectal cancers, remains a major clinical concern. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging, surgical techniques, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment have steadily improved rectal cancer outcomes. Considering this, the Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary (KRCM) Committee has aimed to provide clinicians and policymakers with up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to support optimal decision-making, reflecting current evidence, the Korean healthcare context, and patient values and preferences. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0 were developed through multidisciplinary collaboration with related academic societies, building upon and updating the KRCM Clinical Practice Guidelines version 1.0 (titled “Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of rectal cancer”). These consensus guidelines of the KRCM were established based on a comprehensive literature review, evidence synthesis, with recommendation development guided by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and consideration of applicability in real-world clinical practice under the national health insurance system. Each recommendation has been presented with its strength and level of evidence.

Background: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder characterized by erythema, papules, ocular symptoms, and heightened sensitivity. Patients with neurogenic symptoms such as burning or stinging remain particularly difficult to manage. Current guidelines often underrepresent energy-based devices (EBDs), pigmentary sequelae, psychosocial burden, and ocular comorbidities. Objective: To examine Korean dermatologists’ expert perspectives on rosacea management, focusing on skin sensitivity, neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary changes, psychosocial impact, ocular involvement, and EBD use. Methods: A web-based, 29-item survey was administered to 25 board-certified Korean dermatologists (May–June 2025). Quantitative and qualitative responses were analyzed. Results: Erythematotelangiectatic and papulopustular phenotypes with sensitivity skin predominated. EBDs (pulsed dye laser, intense pulsed light) were frequently used but limited by cost and sensitivity issues. Neurogenic symptoms were recognized but rarely treated with neuromodulators. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation was infrequent, yet monitoring was inconsistent.Psychosocial and ocular aspects were acknowledged but seldomly systematically addressed.Respondents expressed interest in emerging adjunctive treatments such as cold plasma, skin boosters, and holistic care approaches. Conclusion Korean dermatologists adopt individualized strategies for rosacea, yet practice gaps remain regarding neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary complications, and psychosocial and ocular comorbidities. Findings support the need for updated multidisciplinary, phenotype-driven guidelines aligned with real-world practice.

Background: Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli is among the most important multidrug-resistant pathogens causing bloodstream infections (BSIs).Cefotaximase (CTX-M) enzymes are the most common and highly diverse ESBL family in E.coli. CTX-M-15 in group CTX-M-1 and CTX-M-14 in group CTX-M-9 are the most extensively disseminated enzymes. Multidrug-resistant E. coli strains complicate empirical therapy and increase healthcare burden globally and in Korea. We investigated the molecular epidemiology, sequence types (STs), and ESBL genotypes of E. coli bloodstream isolates in Korea and identified clinical risk factors for cefotaxime resistance. Methods: We collected all non-duplicated isolates of E. coli and related clinical information from patients with BSIs at eight sentinel hospitals in the Korean Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (Kor-GLASS) collection network during 2017–2021. Duplicate isolates were removed to ensure representativeness of the data. Antimicrobial susceptibility was tested using disk diffusion tests, and multilocus sequence typing and betalactamase genotyping were performed. Results: Among 9,232 E. coli blood isolates, resistance rates to cefotaxime and ceftazidime were 36.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Among the clinical factors, age > 65 yrs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.36), hospital-origin infection (aOR, 2.55), and admission type (intensive care unit [ICU] vs. general ward; aOR, 1.34) were significant cefotaxime resistance risk factors. ST131 was the most prevalent among cefotaxime-resistant E. coli (64.8%, 2,180/3,363), followed by ST1193 (5.3%, N = 177), and ST69 (5.1%, N = 170).ST131, ST648, ST405, and ST410 cefotaxime-resistant E. coli isolates frequently harbored blaCTX-M-15, whereas ST1193 and ST68 showed a high proportion of blaCTX-M-27 carriers, and most ST457 and ST5150 isolates carried blaCTX-M-55. Conclusions Continuous monitoring of ESBL-producing E. coli is required to prevent further dissemination, guide empirical therapy, inform infection control policies, and ensure early detection of multidrug-resistant clones with the potential for widespread transmission.

Background: Copy number variations (CNVs) play an important role in human genetic disorders. Detection of exon-level CNVs is crucial for accurate clinical diagnosis. The CytoScan XON Array, a high-resolution microarray, was recently developed to detect exonic CNVs of various genes. Methods: We evaluated the clinical performance of the CytoScan XON Array using 59 patient samples with previously identified CNVs, confirmed via methods including multiple ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA), gene-dose PCR, and mRNA assay. Concordance between CytoScan XON and orthogonal methods was evaluated in target regions, and diagnostic utility was compared with that of genome sequencing (GS)-based CNV calling tools through analysis of false-positive CNVs in non-target genomic regions. Results: For target regions, the CytoScan XON Array achieved concordance rates of 89.8% and 92.5% at the exon and gene levels, respectively, for all CNV calls. Concordance was higher for multi-exon CNVs (100%) than that for single-exon CNVs (82.6%, P = 0.03). For non-target regions, false-positive CNV calls were reduced to fewer than 0.01 per gene per person through filtering strategies. The array exhibited false-positive detection rates within dosage-sensitive genes comparable with those of GS-based tools. Conclusions The CytoScan XON Array, a reliable tool for detecting exon-level CNVs in target regions, can serve as a complementary approach to GS-based CNV calling tools for genome-wide CNV screening with high resolution. However, its performance for single-exon CNVs requires further optimization. Cross-validation with GS-based CNV calling tools is recommended to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Background: Rapid pathogen identification and antibiotic-susceptibility tests (ASTs) are important for treating bloodstream infections. We compared the performance of the QMAC-dRAST and BD Phoenix M50 direct AST (dPhoenix) systems using bacterial pellets prepared from positive blood culture broth and evaluated their impact on treatment modification. Methods: Direct AST results for 106 Enterobacterales isolates were retrospectively reviewed. Conventional broth microdilution was used to calculate categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME), major error (ME), and minor error (mE). For isolates showing high VMEs in both methods, supplementary tests were performed. Clinical impact was evaluated by calculating the time required to obtain AST results (time-to-result) and observing changes in antibiotics prescribed after performing ASTs. Results: Both systems showed acceptable overall CA, VME, ME, and mE values (QMACdRAST: 93.6%, 1.6%, 0.9%, and 5.3%, respectively; dPhoenix: 93.1%, 0.9%, 0.6%, and 6.2%, respectively). Piperacillin–tazobactam showed high VMEs with QMAC-dRAST (4/20, 20.0%) and dPhoenix (3/20, 15.0%). Colony AST on 13 isolates revealed that QMACdRAST testing yielded lower minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for piperacillin–tazobactam with three isolates, whereas dPhoenix testing yielded higher MICs with two isolates and lower MICs with two isolates. The average time-to-result was 20.8 hr and 30.1 hr for QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix, respectively (P < 0.001). After AST, the number of optimal treatments increased from 43 (46.7%) to 72 (78.3%) (P < 0.001). Conclusions The QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix systems provided reliable AST results with a short time-to-result. However, we recommend performing complementary tests, such as the disk diffusion test, for piperacillin–tazobactam.

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer; however, predictive biomarkers for optimal patient selection remain unsatisfactory. This study was aimed at evaluating the predictive value of tumor mutational burden (TMB) and insertion/deletion (Indel) rate in patients with gastric cancer treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 132 patients with gastric cancer treated with first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and 185 patients treated with chemotherapy alone, all of whom had next-generation sequencing data available. The TMB and Indel cut-offs were set at 15.63 mutations per megabase and 18.19%, respectively, as determined based on their ability to best distinguish progression-free survival (PFS) among the patients who received nivolumab plus chemotherapy. Results: PFS was favorable for nivolumab and chemotherapy than for chemotherapy alone in both the high and low TMB groups; nevertheless, survival benefits were observed only in the high Indel group. Among the subgroups defined based on both TMB and Indel rates, the high TMB and high Indel rate subgroup showed the greatest benefit from nivolumab plus chemotherapy compared with that from chemotherapy alone. The benefit of this subgroup remained significant in patients with proficient mismatch repair (MMR) tumors, whose survival outcomes were comparable to those of patients with deficient MMR tumors.Among patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, high TMB and Indel rate were independently associated with favorable survival outcomes. Conclusions Thus, Indel rate, particularly in combination with TMB, may be a promising predictive biomarker for gastric cancer. However, further validation of their predictive value is warranted.

Purpose: Patient-derived cells (PDCs) and patient-derived organoids (PDOs) are complementary preclinical models widely used in translational cancer research. However, their molecular and functional differences have not been systematically characterized. This study established and analyzed paired PDC and PDO models derived from the same gastric cancer ascites to delineate platform-dependent molecular and functional profiles. Materials and Methods: Malignant ascites or pleural fluid obtained from 6 patients with advanced gastric cancer were used to establish paired PDC and PDO models. All pairs underwent comprehensive multi-omics profiling, integrating genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic data. Phenotypic characterization included morphological, histological, proliferative, and cell cycle analyses. Drug sensitivity assays were performed using 4 chemotherapeutic agents commonly used to treat gastric cancer. Results: The 6 paired PDC and PDO models exhibited distinct morphological characteristics.Whole-genome analyses demonstrated high concordance among primary tumors, PDCs, and PDOs, confirming tumor representation across platforms. Multi-omics profiling identified platform-dependent molecular signatures; PDOs were enriched for extracellular matrix remodeling and stemness, whereas PDCs displayed proliferation- and immune-related signatures. Clinically relevant biomarkers, including HER2 and MET alterations, were concordant with primary tumors. Notably, drug responses differed between platforms and patients, indicating platform-dependent and patient-specific chemosensitivity. Conclusions Paired PDC and PDO models derived from the same patients preserved core patient-specific tumor characteristics while exhibiting distinct molecular and functional profiles. These findings underscore the culture platform as a critical determinant of experimental outcomes and therapeutic responses. Therefore, careful selection of an appropriate preclinical model is essential to accurately address biological questions and optimize precision oncology strategies.

The gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is one of the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Between the 1990s and early 2000s, GIST was identified as a tumor characterized by KIT or PDGFRA mutations, resulting in imatinib being established as an effective targeted therapy. However, with advances in molecular diagnostics, approximately 10%–15% of GISTs have been reported to harbor alternative mutations, such as those in the succinate dehydrogenase subunit genes and BRAF, leading to the development of additional targeted therapies. GISTs exhibit a wide spectrum of clinical behaviors, ranging from indolent to highly aggressive, prompting the development of diverse risk classification systems. However, multiple systems remain in use, leading to inconsistent pathologic reports. Moreover, the mitotic counting method—a key factor in risk stratification—has become a major source of confusion among pathologists owing to the adoption of digital pathology and discrepancies between updated international guidelines and outdated reimbursement requirements. These inconsistencies have hindered pathologic reporting and communication between pathologists and clinicians. This review comprehensively overviews the historical background, molecular subtypes, and risk classification systems of GIST, focusing on evolving issues in mitotic rate evaluation and the application of risk classification systems in clinical practice.