Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a progressive and chronic musculoskeletal condition that continues to be the leading cause of disability worldwide. Conventional treatment approaches for the management of KOA largely focus on symptom alleviation rather than halting or reversing disease progression. However, recent advancements have highlighted the integrated interplay of mechanical stress, inflammation, cellular senescence, and chondrocyte dysfunction in the progression of KOA, in turn prompting new therapeutic strategies. Therefore, emerging interventions such as regenerative medicine, gene therapy, senolytic, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), disease-modifying osteoarthritis drugs (DMODs), and biologics have broadened the therapeutic options. Additionally, natural compounds demonstrated potential in KOA treatment with promising chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects.Moreover, digital technologies and clinical and molecular phenotyping enhanced early diagnosis, monitoring, and personalized management of the disease. Therefore, the current narrative review focuses on the molecular insights, clinical outcomes and prospects for the rapidly evolving landscape of current and emerging treatment approaches for the management of knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Olanzapine is a second-generation antipsychotic drug associated with the development of type 2 diabetes. However, the development and remission of diabetes with glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) antibody (Ab) positivity related to olanzapine treatment have not been reported. Here, we present the case of a 33-year-old man taking olanzapine who was diagnosed with diabetes with GAD Ab positivity complicated by diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). After discontinuation of the drug and tight glycemic control, his diabetes remitted, and the GAD Ab became negative spontaneously after 18 months. The classification of diabetes is challenging because of overlapping autoimmune and metabolic features. Olanzapine may have contributed to pancreatic β-cell apoptosis, which could potentially trigger autoimmunity and the development of type 1 diabetes-like features (DKA as the initial presentation, a low C-peptide level, and GAD Ab positivity). The rapid amelioration of hyperglycemia and weight reduction may be responsible for the remission of diabetes after the discontinuation of olanzapine.

Subglottic stenosis (SGS) and tracheal stenosis (TS) are rare conditions that can cause significant breathing difficulties and, if not properly managed, may lead to life-threatening complications. Despite their clinical importance, debate continues regarding the optimal management of adult SGS and TS, and no comprehensive guidelines have been established to date. The Korean Bronchoesophagological Society appointed a task force to develop clinical practice guidelines with the goal of providing evidence-based recommendations for managing SGS and TS in adults. The task force conducted a systematic review of the relevant literature by searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using predefined search terms aligned with key clinical questions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, which also informed the formulation and reporting of the recommendations. The strength of each recommendation reflects the guideline panel’s confidence that the benefits of an intervention outweigh its risks for eligible patients. After drafting the guidelines, feedback was obtained through Delphi questionnaires completed by members of the Korean Bronchoesophagological Society. Ultimately, the committee developed 17 evidence-based recommendations across four categories: initial evaluation, medical management, surgical treatment, and postoperative management and rehabilitation. These guidelines aim to support clinicians in delivering optimal care to adult patients with SGS and TS.

Purpose: To investigate the clinical characteristics of South Korean patients with pericentral retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and to identify clinical biomarkers associated with rapid visual acuity decline based on baseline factors. Methods: This retrospective study included 59 eyes of 31 patients diagnosed with pericentral RP. Comprehensive ophthalmological examinations and genetic sequencing were conducted to assess the baseline characteristics. For biomarker analysis, eyes were categorized into two groups based on the annual rate of change in visual acuity. The clinical findings of the two groups were evaluated to identify the biomarkers associated with rapid loss of visual acuity. Results: Patients with pericentral RP in this study exhibited a mean best-corrected visual acuity of 0.17 ± 0.23 in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution. The visual field test showed annular or semicircular scotoma with relatively preserved periphery and 27 eyes (45.8%) exhibited no macular complications in optical coherence tomography. Genetic analysis identified genes associated with previous typical and pericentral RP studies but also highlighted that many genetic causes of pericentral RP remain unidentified. Of the 55 eyes for which the rate of visual acuity change could be estimated, 18 exhibited an annual decline of ≥10%, whereas 37 showed an annual decline of <10%. Male sex and prolonged b-wave latency on dark-adapted 0.01 electroretinogram correlated with rapid visual acuity decline in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions South Korean patients with pericentral RP exhibited a milder phenotype compared to typical RP patients reported in previous studies. Genetic analysis revealed heterogeneity, with mutations in some genes commonly associated with milder forms of RP. Male sex and prolonged b-wave latency on dark-adapted 0.01 electroretinogram were significant biomarkers for predicting rapid visual acuity decline. Monitoring initial b-wave latency is important for predicting visual decline, particularly in male patients with pericentral RP.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is called ‘smoker’s disease’ because it is strongly associated with smoking and most cases occur in smokers. However, it can also occur in never smokers. We investigated the clinical features of never smokers with SCLC and compared their treatment outcomes with those of smokers with SCLC. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who had proven SCLC and had received chemotherapy at a single cancer center between July 2002 and April 2021. Results: Of 1,643 patients, 1,416 (86.2%) were enrolled in this study. A total of 162 (11.4%) and 1,254 (88.6%) patients were never smokers and smokers, respectively. There were more female never smokers than smokers (n=130; 80.2% vs. 79, 6.3%, p=0.000), and the incidence of ischemic heart disease was lower among never smokers than among smokers (4/1,416, [2.5%] vs. 83/1,416 [6.6%], p=0.036). Never smokers showed less symptoms at diagnosis than smokers (80.9% vs. 87.2%, p=0.037); however, they showed more toxicity after first-line treatment (61.7% vs. 47.8%, p=0.001). The objective response rate (ORR) was significantly higher in never smokers (74.1% vs. 59.6%, p=0.000). In the multivariate analysis, never smoking and second-line treatment were associated with a better ORR. However, progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between never smokers and smokers. Conclusion In conclusion, never smokers accounted for 11.4% of patients with SCLC. They had distinguishing clinical characteristics and showed better chemotherapeutic responses than smokers.

Current approaches to regulating osteoarthritis primarily focus on symptom management; however, these methods often have significant side effects and may not be suitable for long-term care. As an alternative to conventional treatments, injecting stem cells into knee joint cartilage is a promising option for repairing damaged cartilage. In this review, we outline the general procedure for stem cell treatment of knee joint cartilage regeneration, emphasizing the potential of intra-articular stem cell injections as a therapeutic option for osteoarthritis. We examined and summarized patient evaluation and preparation for knee joint stem cell therapy, stem cell harvesting, stem cell preparation, injection procedures for stem cell therapy, post-injection care and monitoring, potential outcomes of stem cell therapy, and considerations and risks associated with stem cell therapy. Overall, stem cell injections for knee joint cartilage damage represent a promising frontier in orthopedic care. They offer potential benefits such as pain and inflammation reduction, promotion of cartilage repair and regeneration, and the possibility of avoiding more invasive treatments such as knee surgery. Ongoing collaboration among researchers, clinicians, and regulatory organizations is crucial for advancing this field and translating scientific discoveries into effective clinical applications.