In recent years, next-generation sequencing (NGS)–based genetic testing has become crucial in cancer care. While its primary objective is to identify actionable genetic alterations to guide treatment decisions, its scope has broadened to encompass aiding in pathological diagnosis and exploring resistance mechanisms. With the ongoing expansion in NGS application and reliance, a compelling necessity arises for expert consensus on its application in solid cancers. To address this demand, the forthcoming recommendations not only provide pragmatic guidance for the clinical use of NGS but also systematically classify actionable genes based on specific cancer types. Additionally, these recommendations will incorporate expert perspectives on crucial biomarkers, ensuring informed decisions regarding circulating tumor DNA panel testing.

In recent years, next-generation sequencing (NGS)–based genetic testing has become crucial in cancer care. While its primary objective is to identify actionable genetic alterations to guide treatment decisions, its scope has broadened to encompass aiding in pathological diagnosis and exploring resistance mechanisms. With the ongoing expansion in NGS application and reliance, a compelling necessity arises for expert consensus on its application in solid cancers. To address this demand, the forthcoming recommendations not only provide pragmatic guidance for the clinical use of NGS but also systematically classify actionable genes based on specific cancer types. Additionally, these recommendations will incorporate expert perspectives on crucial biomarkers, ensuring informed decisions regarding circulating tumor DNA panel testing.

Background/Aims: Non-celiac gluten sensitivity is characterized by intestinal and extra intestinal symptoms associated with the consumption of gluten-containing food. Since biomarkers for non-celiac gluten sensitivity are lacking, its prevalence is estimated based on self-reported symptoms. However, no data exist on self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity in the Korean population. Thus, we aim to investigate the prevalence of self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity in the Korean population and to determine its demographic and clinical characteristics. Methods: This study surveyed Korean participants aged 18-80 years who visited gastroenterology outpatient clinics at 9 tertiary hospitals in South Korea from January 2016 to February 2017. They were questioned regarding symptoms related to gluten ingestion: degree of discomfort (visual analog scale score), frequency, time of symptom onset, and duration. Abdominal discomfort caused by 11 differentkinds of gluten-containing Korean food items was investigated. Results: More non-celiac gluten sensitivity self-reporters were identified among those with irritable bowel syndrome (33.6%) than among controls (5.8%). Major gastrointestinal symptoms included bloating (75.0%), abdominal discomfort (71.3%), and belching (45.0%).Common extra-intestinal symptoms included fatigue (20.0%) and headache (13.7%). More than half of those who self-reported nonceliac gluten sensitivity (66.3%) developed symptoms within 1 hour of food ingestion, and symptoms were localized in the upper abdomen (37.5%) and entire abdomen (30.0%). Conclusion Our findings suggest that if there are gluten-related symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome, the possibility of accompanying non-celiacgluten sensitivity should be considered.

Purpose: We compared the outcomes of cataract surgery in patients who underwent trabeculectomy and Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Methods: Twenty-nine trabeculectomized eyes of 29 patients (group 1) and 20 Ahmed glaucoma valve-implanted eyes of 20 patients (group 2) were enrolled consecutively. All subjects underwent thorough ophthalmic examinations, including slit-lamp microscopy and Goldmann applanation tonometry preoperatively, on postoperative days 1 and 7, and at postoperative months 1, 3, and 6. The surgical outcomes including intraocular pressure (IOP) and the required number of IOP-lowering medications were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean preoperative IOP in groups 1 and 2 was 15.34 ± 4.34 and 16.35 ± 3.44 mmHg, respectively (p = 0.265). In group 1, the IOP on postoperative day 1 increased significantly (by 3.86 ± 9.69 mmHg, p = 0.038), and the number of IOP-lowering medications rose at both 3 months (0.28 ± 0.70, p = 0.046) and 6 months (0.34 ± 0.94, p = 0.047) postoperatively. Group 2 exhibited no change in the IOP postoperatively or the number of IOP-lowering medications required in the postoperative period. Subconjunctival 5-fluorouracil injections for IOP control were required by two group 1 patients within 1 month postoperatively. Conclusions In patients with a trabeculectomized eye, the IOP increased immediately after cataract surgery; additional IOP-lowering procedures were required by some patients. The number of IOP-lowering medications increased after 3 months postoperatively. As cataract surgery may compromise filtering bleb function to a greater extent in trabeculectomized than in Ahmed glaucoma valve-implanted eyes, the former eyes require closer observation during the early postoperative period.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the Icare ic200 in clinical practice by comparing the intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Icare ic200 rebound tonometer to the IOP measured with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). Methods: A total of 294 eyes of 294 Korean patients were included. IOP was measured with the Icare ic200 and then measured again with a GAT in all patients. We evaluated the degree of IOP agreement between the two tonometers and analyzed the diagnostic ability of the Icare ic200 for a reading ≥ 22 mmHg with the GAT. We also analyzed whether clinical factors including biometry affected the difference in IOP measured by the two tonometers. Results: The IOP values measured with the Icare ic200 and GAT were strongly correlated (r = 0.875, p < 0.001). The IOP measured with the Icare ic200 was lower than the IOP measured with GAT. The mean difference was 3.07 ± 2.67 mmHg, and 95.24% of patients were distributed within the 95% limits of agreement (-2.16 to 8.30 mmHg) on Bland-Altman plots. The diagnostic ability of the Icare ic200 for IOP ≥ 22 mmHg was 0.959 (area under the receiver operating characterisitic). In multivariate regression analyses, older age (β = 0.034, p = 0.020) and greater corneal curvature (β = 0.213, p = 0.030) were correlated with larger IOP differences between the two tonometers. Conclusions Although the Icare ic200 was more consistent than the GAT with reasonable diagnostic ability for ≥ 22 mmHg, the IOP measured 3 mmHg lower than the GAT. Therefore, the Icare ic200 might be more useful as a screening test to increase IOP rather than replacing GAT in clinical practice.

Purpose: We compared the outcomes of cataract surgery in patients who underwent trabeculectomy and Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation. Methods: Twenty-nine trabeculectomized eyes of 29 patients (group 1) and 20 Ahmed glaucoma valve-implanted eyes of 20 patients (group 2) were enrolled consecutively. All subjects underwent thorough ophthalmic examinations, including slit-lamp microscopy and Goldmann applanation tonometry preoperatively, on postoperative days 1 and 7, and at postoperative months 1, 3, and 6. The surgical outcomes including intraocular pressure (IOP) and the required number of IOP-lowering medications were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean preoperative IOP in groups 1 and 2 was 15.34 ± 4.34 and 16.35 ± 3.44 mmHg, respectively (p = 0.265). In group 1, the IOP on postoperative day 1 increased significantly (by 3.86 ± 9.69 mmHg, p = 0.038), and the number of IOP-lowering medications rose at both 3 months (0.28 ± 0.70, p = 0.046) and 6 months (0.34 ± 0.94, p = 0.047) postoperatively. Group 2 exhibited no change in the IOP postoperatively or the number of IOP-lowering medications required in the postoperative period. Subconjunctival 5-fluorouracil injections for IOP control were required by two group 1 patients within 1 month postoperatively. Conclusions In patients with a trabeculectomized eye, the IOP increased immediately after cataract surgery; additional IOP-lowering procedures were required by some patients. The number of IOP-lowering medications increased after 3 months postoperatively. As cataract surgery may compromise filtering bleb function to a greater extent in trabeculectomized than in Ahmed glaucoma valve-implanted eyes, the former eyes require closer observation during the early postoperative period.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the Icare ic200 in clinical practice by comparing the intraocular pressure (IOP) measured with the Icare ic200 rebound tonometer to the IOP measured with the Goldmann applanation tonometer (GAT). Methods: A total of 294 eyes of 294 Korean patients were included. IOP was measured with the Icare ic200 and then measured again with a GAT in all patients. We evaluated the degree of IOP agreement between the two tonometers and analyzed the diagnostic ability of the Icare ic200 for a reading ≥ 22 mmHg with the GAT. We also analyzed whether clinical factors including biometry affected the difference in IOP measured by the two tonometers. Results: The IOP values measured with the Icare ic200 and GAT were strongly correlated (r = 0.875, p < 0.001). The IOP measured with the Icare ic200 was lower than the IOP measured with GAT. The mean difference was 3.07 ± 2.67 mmHg, and 95.24% of patients were distributed within the 95% limits of agreement (-2.16 to 8.30 mmHg) on Bland-Altman plots. The diagnostic ability of the Icare ic200 for IOP ≥ 22 mmHg was 0.959 (area under the receiver operating characterisitic). In multivariate regression analyses, older age (β = 0.034, p = 0.020) and greater corneal curvature (β = 0.213, p = 0.030) were correlated with larger IOP differences between the two tonometers. Conclusions Although the Icare ic200 was more consistent than the GAT with reasonable diagnostic ability for ≥ 22 mmHg, the IOP measured 3 mmHg lower than the GAT. Therefore, the Icare ic200 might be more useful as a screening test to increase IOP rather than replacing GAT in clinical practice.

Background: We recently discovered the presence of specialized nail mesenchyme below the nail matrix and designated it as onychomatricodermis. Objective: We did further research to characterize the histologic, histochemical, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural features of the onychomatricodermis containing onychofibroblasts in the nail unit. Methods: Ten polydactyly nail unit specimens and 8 nail matrix biopsies were included. H&E-stained slides were reviewed. We did Alcian blue staining and Masson Trichrome staining, as well as immunohistochemical staining for type Ⅰ collagen, CD10, CD13 and CD34. In addition, polydactyly nail units were examined by transmission electron microscopy. Results: In H&E staining, the specialized mesenchyme called onychomatricodermis was observed to be slightly distant from the undersurface of the nail matrix and be less eosinophilic area. Onychomatricodermal onychofibroblasts showed light purple abundant cytoplasm.Masson Trichrome staining revealed fewer collagen fibers within the onychomatricodermis. In Alcian blue staining the onychomatricodermis showed mucin deposition within the onychofibroblasts and around them. Immunohistochemically, type Ⅰ collagen was expressed much less in the onychomatricodermis while it was strongly expressed elsewhere in the nail unit. In nail matrix biopsy specimens onychomatricodermal onychofibroblasts expressed CD10 and CD13 strongly, and expressed CD34 as well. Ultrastructurally, collagen fibrils were found sparsely within the onychomatricodermis, whereas collagen fibrils were densely distributed in the dermis of other parts of the nail unit. Conclusion We demonstrated that there was less collagen expression in the onychomatricodermis containing onychofibroblasts. In addition, we found morphological and immunohistochemical features of onychomatricodermal onychofibroblasts (onychofibroblasts of Dongyoun). These findings support the presence of onychomatricodermis containing onychofibroblasts in the nail unit.

Purpose: We report a case of familial amyloid polyneuropathy in a patient presenting with open-angle glaucoma and progressive vitreous opacity.Case summary: A 62-year-old female patient presented with uncontrolled intraocular pressure (IOP) in the left eye that did not respond to medical treatment. She had no history of systemic diseases other than hypertension. Trabeculectomy was performed in the left eye. Thirteen months later, as IOP in the right eye suddenly increased to 50 mmHg and was not controlled, trabeculectomy was also performed in the right eye. Anterior chamber angle was wide and open in both eyes and there were no abnormalities. Vitreous opacity increased gradually in both eyes. Neurological examination was conducted as the patient complained of numbness in the feet, and a diagnosis of familial amyloid polyneuropathy was confirmed. Conclusions Although rare, familial amyloid polyneuropathy and secondary glaucoma should be considered as differential diagnoses in open-angle glaucoma patients showing high intraocular pressure accompanied by progressive vitreous opacity.

Purpose: We report a case of familial amyloid polyneuropathy in a patient presenting with open-angle glaucoma and progressive vitreous opacity.Case summary: A 62-year-old female patient presented with uncontrolled intraocular pressure (IOP) in the left eye that did not respond to medical treatment. She had no history of systemic diseases other than hypertension. Trabeculectomy was performed in the left eye. Thirteen months later, as IOP in the right eye suddenly increased to 50 mmHg and was not controlled, trabeculectomy was also performed in the right eye. Anterior chamber angle was wide and open in both eyes and there were no abnormalities. Vitreous opacity increased gradually in both eyes. Neurological examination was conducted as the patient complained of numbness in the feet, and a diagnosis of familial amyloid polyneuropathy was confirmed. Conclusions Although rare, familial amyloid polyneuropathy and secondary glaucoma should be considered as differential diagnoses in open-angle glaucoma patients showing high intraocular pressure accompanied by progressive vitreous opacity.