Over the past two decades, experimental and clinical evidence has established the interleukin-23 (IL-23)/interleukin-17 (IL-17) axis as a key mediator of psoriatic inflammation. IL-23, primarily derived from activated dendritic cells, supports the survival and pathogenic function of type 17 immune cells, which subsequently release IL-17A, IL-17F, and IL-22 to promote keratinocyte activation and recruit inflammatory leukocytes. These mechanistic insights have directly translated into the development of highly effective biologic therapies targeting IL-17 or IL-23, substantially improving the management of psoriasis. Beyond injectable biologics, growing efforts to overcome limitations related to long-term adherence, cost, and accessibility have accelerated the development of non-injectable therapeutic approaches. Oral and topical small-molecule agents, including selective tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitors and IL-23 receptor antagonists, are now broadening the therapeutic options. At the same time, progress in molecular engineering, artificial intelligence–guided protein design, and spatial multi-omic technologies are refining therapeutic discovery and enabling more precise targeting of pathogenic immune circuits. In this review, we outline the current understanding of the IL-23/IL-17 pathway in psoriasis pathogenesis and provide a critical overview of approved and emerging therapies directed at this pathway. We also address key biological and translational challenges, including tissue-specific cytokine functions, interspecies differences, and long-term safety considerations, and discuss how these factors may inform future strategies for precision immunotherapy in psoriasis.

Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a stroke subtype with high mortality and poor functional outcomes. Prompt occlusion of a ruptured aneurysm at an early stage is crucial to prevent rebleeding, which can result in even higher mortality and more severe disabilities. The most critical initial decision in SAH management is the choice of treatment method with surgical clipping or endovascular coiling. We aimed to develop an evidence-based clinical guideline to select the optimal initial treatment in patients with SAH. We developed this guideline based on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses via a de novo process. A systematic literature review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and KoreaMed) to answer two population, intervention, comparison, outcome questions comparing clipping and coiling. The risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagrams and meta-analyses were generated for functional outcome and mortality. We included six randomized control trials (RCTs) and 58 observational studies. Meta-analysis of RCTs showed that coiling improved functional outcomes compared to clipping (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86–0.97). No significant mortality difference was observed in RCTs (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.91–2.09), but non-RCTs favored clipping for reduced mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69–0.86). However, it is difficult to generalize these findings to all clinical situations, as patients with SAH have a highly variable clinical course. Final treatment decision should be tailored to the individual patient’s status, including aneurysm location, morphology, and the expertise available at the treatment center. Such decisions are best made by specialists such as a board-certified physician and should be explained to the patient and their caregivers, along with the rationale for selecting the most appropriate treatment at the given hospital. Korea has many certified endovascular neurosurgeons, cerebrovascular surgeons, and certified cerebrovascular centers. Proper selection of the most suitable treatment method by certified physicians and centers would greatly benefit patient outcomes and healthcare professionals.

Purpose: We aimed to investigate the causes and clinical features of compressive optic neuropathy in Koreans. Methods: We analyzed the medical records of patients diagnosed with compressive optic neuropathy from March 2014 to December 2023 to determine the cause of optic nerve compression, symptoms and symptom patterns at first visit, accompanying symptoms, types of visual field defects, and visual prognosis after surgery. In addition, the results of visual field tests and optical coherence tomography were analyzed to determine the positivity rate of each test and factors affecting test results. Results: A total of 73 patients were diagnosed with compressive optic neuropathy, and the most common cause was pituitary tumor (37 patients, 50.7%) followed by meningioma (16 patients, 21.9%), hemangioma (4 patients, 5.5%), thyroid ophthalmopathy (4 patients, 5.5%), and paranal sinus tumor tumor (2 patients, 2.7%). In terms of symptom pattern, half of the patients had vision and visual field defects that appeared gradually (41 patients, 56.2%), but there were also quite a few patients whose symptoms appeared suddenly (17 patients, 23.3%). The positivity rate of the diagnostic test was highest for visual field testing (89.0%). In pituitary tumors, tumor size affected diagnostic test results (p = 0.01). Conclusions The most common cause of compressive optic neuropathy in South Koreans was a pituitary tumor. Deterioration of visual function can also occur acutely, and visual field testing was useful for diagnosis.

Background and Objectives: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) is a device that generate vapor by heating e-cigarettes liquid. E-cigarette damages the respiratory immune system and renders the respiratory tract vulnerable to inflammations. However, there are no studies on how the inflammatory reactions in respiratory epithelial cells caused by e-cigarette occur, and the effects of Korean red ginseng (KRG) and saponin on inflammation induced by e-cigarette are unknown. This study aimed to compare the inflammatory reactions caused by e-cigarette and lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and to investigate the effects of KRG and saponin on cytokine and mucin expression induced by e-cigarette in respiratory epithelial cells.Subjects and Method In bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and lung tissue of mice, the effects of KRG and saponin on cytokines (interleukin [IL]-1β, IL-6, IL-8) and mucin 5AC/5B (MUC5AC/5B) expression induced by e-cigarette were investigated using real-time polymerase chain reaction, enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, and immunohistochemistry staining. Results: Inflammatory cells, cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8) and MUC5AC/5B messenger RNA expression and protein production were increased by e-cigarette, similar to LPS. KRG and saponin decreased the expression of cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8) and MUC5AC/5B induced by e-cigarette. KRG and saponin showed effects similar to that of dexamethasone. Conclusion E-cigarette causes inflammation similar to that caused by LPS. KRG and saponin regulate the expression of cytokine and MUC5AC/5B increased by e-cigarette in respiratory epithelial cells. KRG and saponin may be an effective therapeutic option for inflammatory responses induced by e-cigarette in respiratory epithelial cells.

Informed consent is a fundamental aspect of surgical care, designed to reinforce patient autonomy, promote shared decision-making, and potentially mitigate legal conflicts by ensuring the provision of comprehensive and consistent information in clinical practice. The Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology (KSGO) previously published detailed informed consent documents for cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer surgery. However, standardized consent forms remain relatively lacking for laparoscopic-robotic hysterectomy performed for non-malignant indications, as well as for vulvar cancer surgery. Hence, the KSGO subcommittee collected, reviewed, and discussed consent forms from domestic medical institutions and subsequently developed informed consent for laparoscopic-robotic hysterectomy and vulvar cancer surgery, aiming to build patient trust and understanding.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Purpose: Finasteride and dutasteride are used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reduce the risk of developing prostate cancer. Finasteride blocks only the type 2 form of 5-alpha-reductase, whereas dutasteride blocks both type 1 and 2 forms of the enzyme. Previous studies suggest the possibility that dutasteride may be superior to finasteride in preventing prostate cancer. We directly compared the effects of finasteride and dutasteride on the risk of prostate cancer in patients with BPH using a pooled analysis of 15 real-world databases. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cohort study of new-users of finasteride and dutasteride. We include patients who were prescribed 5 mg finasteride or dutasteride for the first time to treat BPH and had at least 180 days of prescription. We excluded patients with a history of prostate cancer or a prostate-specific antigen level ≥ 4 ng/mL before the study drug prescription. Cox regression analysis was performed to examine the hazard ratio (HR) for prostate cancer after propensity score (PS) matching. Results: A total of 8,284 patients of new-users of finasteride and 8,670 patients of new-users of dutasteride were included across the 15 databases. In the overall population, compared to dutasteride, finasteride was associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer in both on-treatment and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods. After 1:1 PS matching, 4,897 patients using finasteride and 4,897 patients using dutasteride were enrolled in the present study. No significant differences were observed for risk of prostate cancer between finasteride and dutasteride both on-treatment (HR=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–1.00; p=0.051) and intent-to-treat time-at-risk periods (HR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.67–1.14; p=0.310). Conclusions Using real-world databases, the present study demonstrated that dutasteride was not associated with a lower risk of prostate cancer than finasteride in patients with BPH.

Current ABO titration methods lack standardization and harmonization. We analyzed the consistency of ABO antibody titer testing among Korean laboratories and discussed future directions for standardization by analyzing external quality control data collected by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service over 5 yrs (2019–2023). The analysis included the number of participating institutions and methods, as well as the proportion of acceptable results. To compare column agglutination technology (CAT) and tube methods, we created a normalized variable: ([log 2 titer of laboratory test result]–[mean of log 2 titer for the peer group]). The number of participating institutions and methods increased over time. The use of CAT methods expanded, whereas that of tube methods declined. The proportion of acceptable results ranged from 84.0% to 100%, with no significant differences between CAT and tube methods. An F-test revealed no significant variance differences among institutions using these methods. Tube methods demonstrated lower variance in anti-human globulin testing, and room temperature tube methods exhibited lower variance than that of CAT methods. Domestic laboratories demonstrated highquality performance in ABO antibody titer testing, with no significant differences in acceptable result rates or variance across methods. Continuous efforts toward standardization remain essential.

Background: The Korean Occupational Stress Scale (KOSS) was developed in 2004. During this time, industrial structures have evolved, and societal awareness of occupational stress has changed. This study aims to develop and validate a revised version of the Korean Occupational Stress Scale (KOSS®19), tailored for workers, reflecting these changes. Methods: The KOSS®19 was developed based on the 26-item KOSS–short form (SF) through a review by eight experts. A survey was conducted including 359 service industry workers, comprising the KOSS®19, Burnout, and Depression scales. The KOSS®19 subscales were restructured, and their reliability and validity were evaluated. Results: The KOSS®19 composed of eight subscales: hazardous physical environment (2 items), high job demand (3 items), insufficient job control (2 items), low social support (2 items), job insecurity (2 items), organizational injustice (4 items), lack of reward (2 items), and work-life imbalance (2 items). The reliability and validity of the KOSS®19 were found to be satisfactory. Conclusions The KOSS®19 is a suitable tool for assessing occupational stress, effectively replacing the original KOSS and KOSS-SF.