Background/Aims: Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare malignancy with poor prognosis. We investigated genomic determinants of clinical benefit from gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel (GAP) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in advanced BTC. Methods: Clinical and genomic data using TruSight Oncology 500 were analyzed from patients treated with GAP (N=198) or GC (N=89) as first-line therapy. Results: With a median follow-up of 33.0 months, GAP modestly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.764; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.591–0.989) without significant overall survival (OS) difference compared to GC. Genomic profiling revealed frequent alterations in TP53 (35.2%), KRAS (16.4%), SMAD4 (10.5%), and TNFRSF14 (10.5%), involving RTK/RAS (44.3%), TP53 (41.8%), and PI3K (20.2%) pathways. Single-gene mutations did not predict treatment benefit. However, pathway-level analysis identified PI3K pathway activation as significantly associated with inferior PFS (HR 2.148; 95% CI 1.478–3.124) and OS (HR 2.096; 95% CI 1.413–3.109) in patients receiving GAP, an effect not observed with GC. Importantly, GAP conferred clinical benefit only in patients without PI3K pathway activation, while no survival advantage was seen in those with such alterations (Pinteraction=0.023 for PFS, Pinteraction=0.003 for OS). Similar results were obtained in the independent validation cohort treated with GAP (N=103) or GC (N=64) for BTC. Conclusions Genomic profiling using next-generation sequencing identified PI3K pathway activation as key molecular determinant that differentiates patient outcomes between GAP and GC treatments in advanced BTC.

In patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), initial recurrence risk stratification based on clinical, histopathological, and perioperative data remains the key determinant for guiding management strategies during the first 1-2 years post-treatment. However, the adoption of ongoing risk stratification (ORS), which dynamically reassesses risk by integrating longitudinal clinical data and treatment response, enables more precise long-term prognostic assessment and facilitates highly individualized management. Building upon recent guidelines, the 2026 KTA guideline has been further refined by incorporating robust evidence from large-scale national cohorts and comprehensive systematic reviews. These updated recommendations outline contemporary concepts of ORS, risk-adapted TSH suppression targets, optimized surveillance modalities for recurrence detection, and disease-specific long-term follow-up strategies. Reflecting the paradigm shift toward de-escalated treatment, this revision integrates evolved perspectives on TSH suppression intensity, the clinical interpretation of thyroglobulin levels, and tailored follow-up intervals. These evidence-based recommendations aim to minimize unnecessary treatment and excessive surveillance in the large proportion of patients with excellent prognosis after initial therapy, while ensuring that each patient receives appropriately tailored and effective long-term management.

Purpose: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has long been recognized as an effective treatment for depression and suicidality.Virtual reality (VR) technology is widely used for cognitive training for conditions such as anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, but little research has considered VR-based CBT for depressive symptoms and suicidality. We tested the effectiveness and safety of a VR-based CBT program for depressive disorders. Materials and Methods: We recruited 57 participants from May 2022 through February 2023 using online advertisements. This multi-center, assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled exploratory trial used two groups: VR treatment group and treat as usual (TAU) group. VR treatment group received a VR mental health training/education program. TAU group received standard pharmacotherapy. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately after the 6-week treatment period, and 4 weeks after the end of the treatment period in each group. Results: Depression scores decreased significantly over time in both VR treatment and TAU groups, with no differences between the two groups. The suicidality score decreased significantly only in VR group. No group differences were found in the remission or response rate for depression, perceived stress, or clinical severity. No adverse events or motion sickness occurred during the VR treatment program. Conclusion VR CBT treatment for major depressive disorder has the potential to be equivalent to the gold-standard pharmacotherapy in reducing depressive symptoms, suicidality, and related clinical symptoms, with no difference in improvement found in this study. Thus, VR-based CBT might be an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy for depressive disorders.

Purpose: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has long been recognized as an effective treatment for depression and suicidality.Virtual reality (VR) technology is widely used for cognitive training for conditions such as anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, but little research has considered VR-based CBT for depressive symptoms and suicidality. We tested the effectiveness and safety of a VR-based CBT program for depressive disorders. Materials and Methods: We recruited 57 participants from May 2022 through February 2023 using online advertisements. This multi-center, assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled exploratory trial used two groups: VR treatment group and treat as usual (TAU) group. VR treatment group received a VR mental health training/education program. TAU group received standard pharmacotherapy. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately after the 6-week treatment period, and 4 weeks after the end of the treatment period in each group. Results: Depression scores decreased significantly over time in both VR treatment and TAU groups, with no differences between the two groups. The suicidality score decreased significantly only in VR group. No group differences were found in the remission or response rate for depression, perceived stress, or clinical severity. No adverse events or motion sickness occurred during the VR treatment program. Conclusion VR CBT treatment for major depressive disorder has the potential to be equivalent to the gold-standard pharmacotherapy in reducing depressive symptoms, suicidality, and related clinical symptoms, with no difference in improvement found in this study. Thus, VR-based CBT might be an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy for depressive disorders.

Purpose: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has long been recognized as an effective treatment for depression and suicidality.Virtual reality (VR) technology is widely used for cognitive training for conditions such as anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, but little research has considered VR-based CBT for depressive symptoms and suicidality. We tested the effectiveness and safety of a VR-based CBT program for depressive disorders. Materials and Methods: We recruited 57 participants from May 2022 through February 2023 using online advertisements. This multi-center, assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled exploratory trial used two groups: VR treatment group and treat as usual (TAU) group. VR treatment group received a VR mental health training/education program. TAU group received standard pharmacotherapy. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately after the 6-week treatment period, and 4 weeks after the end of the treatment period in each group. Results: Depression scores decreased significantly over time in both VR treatment and TAU groups, with no differences between the two groups. The suicidality score decreased significantly only in VR group. No group differences were found in the remission or response rate for depression, perceived stress, or clinical severity. No adverse events or motion sickness occurred during the VR treatment program. Conclusion VR CBT treatment for major depressive disorder has the potential to be equivalent to the gold-standard pharmacotherapy in reducing depressive symptoms, suicidality, and related clinical symptoms, with no difference in improvement found in this study. Thus, VR-based CBT might be an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy for depressive disorders.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: Residents and nurses who activate rapid response teams (RRTs) are well positioned to offer insights on its effectiveness. Here, we assess such evaluation of RRTs and identify barriers to activation in a 1,400-bed teaching hospital. Methods: We conducted a 24-item Likert-scale survey from January to May 2017 among residents and ward nurses with RRT experience. Factor analysis was used to identify the barriers. Results: This study comprised 305 nurses and 53 residents, most of whom were satisfied with their RRT experiences. Factor analysis showed that lack of awareness of activation criteria was a major barrier, with only 21.4% and 22.2% participants, respectively, confident about their knowledge of activation protocols. Of the survey respondents, 85.7% reported first contacting the doctor before activating the RRT. Despite the protocol, 66.7% first discussed the decision with other staff, and 71.5% called the RRT when the patient’s condition worsened despite management. Conclusions Nurses and residents value RRTs but face barriers in initiation, primarily due to a lack of confidence in applying the activation criteria. Many prefer to consult a doctor or manage the patient before calling the RRT.

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin disease with a wide range of symptoms. Due to the rapidly changing treatment landscape, regular updates to clinical guidelines are needed. Objective: This study aimed to update the guidelines for the treatment of AD to reflect recent therapeutic advances and evidence-based recommendations. Methods: The Patient characteristics, type of Intervention, Control, and Outcome framework was used to determine 48 questions related to AD management. Evidence was graded, recommendations were determined, and, after 2 voting rounds among the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) council members, consensus was achieved. Results: This guideline provides treatment guidance on advanced systemic treatment modalities for AD. In particular, the guideline offers up-to-date treatment recommendations for biologics and Janus-kinase inhibitors used in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe AD.It also provides guidance on other therapies for AD, along with tailored recommendations for children, adolescents, the elderly, and pregnant or breastfeeding women. Conclusion KADA’s updated AD treatment guidelines incorporate the latest evidence and expert opinion to provide a comprehensive approach to AD treatment. The guidelines will help clinicians optimize patient-specific therapies.

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin disease with a wide range of symptoms. Due to the rapidly changing treatment landscape, regular updates to clinical guidelines are needed. Objective: This study aimed to update the guidelines for the treatment of AD to reflect recent therapeutic advances and evidence-based practices. Methods: The Patient characteristics, type of Intervention, Control, and Outcome framework was used to determine 48 questions related to AD management. Evidence was graded, recommendations were determined, and, after 2 voting rounds among the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) council members, consensus was achieved. Results: The guidelines provide detailed recommendations on foundational therapies, including the use of moisturizers, cleansing and bathing practices, allergen avoidance, and patient education. Guidance on topical therapies, such as topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors, is also provided to help manage inflammation and maintain skin barrier function in patients with AD. Additionally, recommendations on conventional systemic therapies, including corticosteroids, cyclosporine, and methotrexate, are provided for managing moderate to severe AD. Conclusion KADA’s updated AD guidelines offer clinicians evidence-based strategies focused on basic therapies, topical therapies, and conventional systemic therapies, equipping them to enhance quality of care and improve patient outcomes in AD management.

Background: In 2006, the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) working group released the diagnostic criteria for Korean atopic dermatitis (AD). Recently, more simplified, and practical AD diagnostic criteria have been proposed. Objective: Based on updated criteria and experience, we studied to develop and share a consensus on diagnostic criteria for AD in Koreans. Materials and Methods: For the diagnostic criteria, a questionnaire was constructed by searching the English-language literature in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. A modified Delphi method composed of 3 rounds of email questionnaires was adopted for the consensus process. Fifty-four KADA council members participated in the 3 rounds of votes and expert consensus recommendations were established. Results: Diagnostic criteria for AD include pruritus, eczema with age-specific pattern, and chronic or relapsing history. Diagnostic aids for AD encompass xerosis, immunoglobulin E reactivity, hand–foot eczema, periorbital changes, periauricular changes, perioral changes, nipple eczema, perifollicular accentuation, and personal or family history of atopy. Conclusion This study streamlined and updated the diagnostic criteria for AD in Korea, making them more practicable for use in real-world clinical field.