In this paper， by referring to ancient and modern literature， the textual research of Inulae Flos has been conducted to clarify the name， origin， production area， quality evaluation， harvesting， processing and others， so as to provide reference and basis for the development and utilization of famous classical formulas containing this herb. After textual research， it could be verified that the medicinal use of Inulae Flos was first recorded in Shennong Bencaojing of the Han dynasty. In successive dynasties， Xuanfuhua has been taken as the official name， and it also has other alternative names such as Jinfeicao， Daogeng and Jinqianhua. The period before the Song and Yuan dynasties， the main origin of Inulae Flos was the Asteraceae plant Inula japonica， and from the Ming and Qing dynasties to the present， I. japonica and I. britannica are the primary source. In addition to the dominant basal species， there are also regional species such as I. linariifolia， I. helianthus-aquatili， and I. hupehensis. The earliest recorded production areas in ancient times were Henan， Hubei and other places， and the literature records that it has been distributed throughout the country since modern times. The medicinal part is its flower， the harvesting and processing method recorded in the past dynasties is mainly harvested in the fifth and ninth lunar months， and dried in the sun， and the modern harvesting is mostly harvested in summer and autumn when the flowers bloom， in order to remove impurities， dry in the shade or dry in the sun. In addition， the roots， whole herbs and aerial parts are used as medicinal materials. In ancient times， there were no records about the quality of Inulae Flos， and in modern times， it is generally believed that the quality of complete flower structure， small receptacles， large blooms， yellow petals， long filaments， many fluffs， no fragments， and no branches is better. Ancient processing methods primarily involved cleaning， steaming， and sun-drying， supplemented by techniques such as boiling， roasting， burning， simmering， stir-frying， and honey-processing. Modern processing focuses mainly on cleaning the stems and leaves before use. Regarding the medicinal properties， ancient texts describe it as salty and sweet in taste， slightly warm in nature， and mildly toxic. Modern studies characterize it as bitter， pungent， and salty in taste， with a slightly warm nature. Its therapeutic effects remain consistent across eras， including descending Qi， resolving phlegm， promoting diuresis， and stopping vomiting. Based on the research results， it is recommended that when developing famous classical formulas containing Inulae Flos， either I. japonica or I. britannica should be used as the medicinal source. Processing methods should follow formula requirements， where no processing instructions are specified， the raw products may be used after cleaning.

In this paper， by referring to ancient and modern literature， the textual research of Inulae Flos has been conducted to clarify the name， origin， production area， quality evaluation， harvesting， processing and others， so as to provide reference and basis for the development and utilization of famous classical formulas containing this herb. After textual research， it could be verified that the medicinal use of Inulae Flos was first recorded in Shennong Bencaojing of the Han dynasty. In successive dynasties， Xuanfuhua has been taken as the official name， and it also has other alternative names such as Jinfeicao， Daogeng and Jinqianhua. The period before the Song and Yuan dynasties， the main origin of Inulae Flos was the Asteraceae plant Inula japonica， and from the Ming and Qing dynasties to the present， I. japonica and I. britannica are the primary source. In addition to the dominant basal species， there are also regional species such as I. linariifolia， I. helianthus-aquatili， and I. hupehensis. The earliest recorded production areas in ancient times were Henan， Hubei and other places， and the literature records that it has been distributed throughout the country since modern times. The medicinal part is its flower， the harvesting and processing method recorded in the past dynasties is mainly harvested in the fifth and ninth lunar months， and dried in the sun， and the modern harvesting is mostly harvested in summer and autumn when the flowers bloom， in order to remove impurities， dry in the shade or dry in the sun. In addition， the roots， whole herbs and aerial parts are used as medicinal materials. In ancient times， there were no records about the quality of Inulae Flos， and in modern times， it is generally believed that the quality of complete flower structure， small receptacles， large blooms， yellow petals， long filaments， many fluffs， no fragments， and no branches is better. Ancient processing methods primarily involved cleaning， steaming， and sun-drying， supplemented by techniques such as boiling， roasting， burning， simmering， stir-frying， and honey-processing. Modern processing focuses mainly on cleaning the stems and leaves before use. Regarding the medicinal properties， ancient texts describe it as salty and sweet in taste， slightly warm in nature， and mildly toxic. Modern studies characterize it as bitter， pungent， and salty in taste， with a slightly warm nature. Its therapeutic effects remain consistent across eras， including descending Qi， resolving phlegm， promoting diuresis， and stopping vomiting. Based on the research results， it is recommended that when developing famous classical formulas containing Inulae Flos， either I. japonica or I. britannica should be used as the medicinal source. Processing methods should follow formula requirements， where no processing instructions are specified， the raw products may be used after cleaning.

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is a common head and neck malignancy. Approximately 50% to 60% of patients with OSCC are diagnosed at a locally advanced stage (clinical staging III-IVa). Even with comprehensive and sequential treatment primarily based on surgery, the 5-year overall survival rate remains below 50%, and patients often suffer from postoperative functional impairments such as difficulties with speaking and swallowing. Programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors are increasingly used in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced OSCC and have shown encouraging efficacy. However, clinical practice still faces key challenges, including the definition of indications, optimization of combination regimens, and standards for efficacy evaluation. Based on the latest research advances worldwide and the clinical experience of the expert group, this expert consensus systematically evaluates the application of PD-1 inhibitors in the neoadjuvant treatment of locally advanced OSCC, covering combination strategies, treatment cycles and surgical timing, efficacy assessment, use of biomarkers, management of special populations and immune related adverse events, principles for immunotherapy rechallenge, and function preservation strategies. After multiple rounds of panel discussion and through anonymous voting using the Delphi method, the following consensus statements have been formulated: 1) Neoadjuvant therapy with PD-1 inhibitors can be used preoperatively in patients with locally advanced OSCC. The preferred regimen is a PD-1 inhibitor combined with platinum based chemotherapy, administered for 2-3 cycles. 2) During the efficacy evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy, radiographic assessment should follow the dual criteria of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 and immune RECIST (iRECIST). After surgery, systematic pathological evaluation of both the primary lesion and regional lymph nodes is required. For combination chemotherapy regimens, PD-L1 expression and combined positive score need not be used as mandatory inclusion or exclusion criteria. 3) For special populations such as the elderly (≥ 70 years), individuals with stable HIV viral load, and carriers of chronic HBV/HCV, PD-1 inhibitors may be used cautiously under the guidance of a multidisciplinary team (MDT), with close monitoring for adverse events. 4) For patients with a poor response to neoadjuvant therapy, continuation of the original treatment regimen is not recommended; the subsequent treatment plan should be adjusted promptly after MDT assessment. Organ transplant recipients and patients with active autoimmune diseases are not recommended to receive neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitor therapy due to the high risk of immune related activation. Rechallenge is generally not advised for patients who have experienced high risk immune related adverse events such as immune mediated myocarditis, neurotoxicity, or pneumonitis. 5) For patients with a good pathological response, individualized de escalation surgery and function preservation strategies can be explored. This consensus aims to promote the standardized, safe, and precise application of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitor strategies in the management of locally advanced OSCC patients.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

As new evidence emerges, treatment strategies toward the functional cure of chronic hepatitis B are evolving. In 2019, a panel of national hepatologists published a Consensus Statement on the functional cure of chronic hepatitis B. Currently, an international group of hepatologists has been assembled to evaluate research since the publication of the original consensus, and to collaboratively develop the updated statements. The 2.0 Consensus was aimed to update the original consensus with the latest available studies, and provide a comprehensive overview of the current relevant scientific literatures regarding functional cure of hepatitis B, with a particular focus on issues that are not yet fully clarified. These cover the definition of functional cure of hepatitis B, its mechanisms and barriers, the effective strategies and treatment roadmap to achieve this endpoint, in particular new surrogate biomarkers used to measure efficacy or to predict response, and the appropriate approach to pursuing a functional cure in special populations, the development of emerging antivirals and immunomodulators with potential for curing hepatitis B. The statements are primarily intended to offer international guidance for clinicians in their practice to enhance the functional cure rate of chronic hepatitis B.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

Objective: The CT/MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) demonstrates high specificity with relatively limited sensitivity for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. This study aimed to explore the possibility of improving sensitivity by combining CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 with second-line contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS v2017 using sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) or perfluorobutane (PFB). Materials and Methods: This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected multicenter data included high-risk patients with treatment-naive hepatic observations. The reference standard was pathological confirmation or a composite reference standard (only for benign lesions). Each participant underwent concurrent CT/MRI, SHF-enhanced US, and PFB-enhanced US examinations. The diagnostic performances for HCC of CT/MRI LI-RADS alone and three combination strategies (combining CT/ MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or a modified algorithm incorporating the Kupffer-phase findings for PFB [modified PFB]) were evaluated. For the three combination strategies, apart from the CT/MRI LR-5 criteria, HCC was diagnosed if CT/MRI LR-3 or LR-4 observations met the LR-5 criteria using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB. Results: In total, 281 participants (237 males; mean age, 55 ± 11 years) with 306 observations (227 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, and 39 benign lesions) were included. Using LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB, 20, 23, and 31 CT/MRI LR-3/4 observations, respectively, were reclassified as LR-5, and all were pathologically confirmed as HCCs. Compared to CT/MRI LI-RADS alone (74%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%–79%), the three combination strategies combining CT/MRI LI-RADS with either LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, or modified PFB increased sensitivity (83% [95% CI: 77%–87%], 84% [95% CI: 79%–89%], 88% [95% CI: 83%–92%], respectively; all P < 0.001), while maintaining the specificity at 92% (95% CI: 84%–97%). Conclusion The combination of CT/MRI LI-RADS with second-line CEUS using SHF or PFB improved the sensitivity of HCC diagnosis without compromising specificity.

As new evidence emerges, treatment strategies toward the functional cure of chronic hepatitis B are evolving. In 2019, a panel of national hepatologists published a Consensus Statement on the functional cure of chronic hepatitis B. Currently, an international group of hepatologists has been assembled to evaluate research since the publication of the original consensus, and to collaboratively develop the updated statements. The 2.0 Consensus was aimed to update the original consensus with the latest available studies, and provide a comprehensive overview of the current relevant scientific literatures regarding functional cure of hepatitis B, with a particular focus on issues that are not yet fully clarified. These cover the definition of functional cure of hepatitis B, its mechanisms and barriers, the effective strategies and treatment roadmap to achieve this endpoint, in particular new surrogate biomarkers used to measure efficacy or to predict response, and the appropriate approach to pursuing a functional cure in special populations, the development of emerging antivirals and immunomodulators with potential for curing hepatitis B. The statements are primarily intended to offer international guidance for clinicians in their practice to enhance the functional cure rate of chronic hepatitis B.