Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are an important treatment option for ulcerative colitis, providing rapid onset of action, oral administration, and efficacy even after biologic failure. The 3 approved agents—tofacitinib, filgotinib, and upadacitinib—differ in JAK isoform selectivity, leading to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety. Evidence from network meta-analyses, clinical trials, and real-world studies consistently shows that upadacitinib provides the highest efficacy for induction and maintenance of remission, whereas filgotinib demonstrates the most favorable safety profile. The strong efficacy of upadacitinib and tofacitinib is particularly relevant in patients with severe disease, including acute severe ulcerative colitis, and upadacitinib maintains high efficacy regardless of prior advanced therapy exposure. JAK inhibitors also benefit extraintestinal manifestations. Although risks such as herpes zoster, serious infection, thromboembolism, and major cardiovascular events differ among agents, long-term data suggest generally acceptable safety when used appropriately. Intraclass JAK-to-JAK cycling is feasible, with about half of patients achieving steroid-free clinical remission in retrospective cohorts. Based on mechanistic, clinical, and real-world evidence, filgotinib may be a first-line option for patients with lower disease activity or when safety is a priority, whereas upadacitinib or tofacitinib may be preferred in higher disease activity. Strategically selecting agents may improve durability and outcomes.

Rectal cancer, which accounts for approximately 40% of colorectal cancers, remains a major clinical concern. Recent advances in diagnostic imaging, surgical techniques, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment have steadily improved rectal cancer outcomes. Considering this, the Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary (KRCM) Committee has aimed to provide clinicians and policymakers with up-to-date, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to support optimal decision-making, reflecting current evidence, the Korean healthcare context, and patient values and preferences. The Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0 were developed through multidisciplinary collaboration with related academic societies, building upon and updating the KRCM Clinical Practice Guidelines version 1.0 (titled “Multidisciplinary guidelines for the management of rectal cancer”). These consensus guidelines of the KRCM were established based on a comprehensive literature review, evidence synthesis, with recommendation development guided by the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, and consideration of applicability in real-world clinical practice under the national health insurance system. Each recommendation has been presented with its strength and level of evidence.

Purpose: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become a standard minimally invasive treatment for selected patients with early gastric cancer (EGC). This study presents the first nationwide survey of patients with EGC treated with ESD in 2023, conducted by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research. Materials and Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from participating referral centers across Korea using a standardized case report form covering patient characteristics, tumor features, procedural details, histopathological findings, and clinical outcomes.Descriptive and comparative analyses were conducted to summarize nationwide ESD practice patterns and outcomes. Results: Data from 5,460 ESD cases from 5,250 patients across 27 institutions were analyzed. The mean age was 67.4 years, with 74.1% males. Multiple synchronous lesions were identified in 3.7%. Most lesions were located in the lower third of the stomach (64.0%), and differentiated-type adenocarcinomas accounted for 87.8%. The en bloc and complete resection rates were 99.2% and 91.4%, respectively. Curative resection was achieved in 80.5%, whereas local non-curative resection (L-NCR) and surgical non-curative resection (S-NCR) were identified in 2.8% and 16.7%, respectively. Additional surgery was performed more frequently in patients with S-NCR than in those with L-NCR (59.3% vs. 24.7%). The bleeding and perforation rates were 3.6% and 0.9%, respectively, and were mostly managed conservatively or endoscopically. The median length of hospitalization was 4.0 days. Conclusions This first nationwide survey provides a comprehensive overview of the current practice of EGC treatment using ESD in Korea, demonstrating high technical success and safety, and establishing a baseline dataset for future longitudinal research.

Probiotics have gained increasing clinical attention as adjunctive treatment for lower gastrointestinal disorders. However, evidence supporting their therapeutic efficacy remains limited, particularly with regard to sex-related differences. This expert review provides evidence-based insights and practical recommendations for the use of probiotics in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional constipation (FC), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), considering possible sex-related differences. Evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses indicates that probiotics can modestly improve global symptoms, abdominal pain, and bloating in IBS and enhance bowel movement frequency and stool consistency in FC. However, these effects are strain-specific and heterogeneous. Although clinical studies on probiotics in IBS have not confirmed significant sex-related differences, experimental animal studies using stress-induced IBS models have demonstrated sex-dependent responses to specific probiotic strains, supporting the biological plausibility of such differences. For CDI, the efficacy of probiotics in preventing primary or recurrent infections remains inconsistent across large trials, and current guidelines usually do not recommend their routine use. However, sex and age difference of immunology supports the clinical differences of CDI. Probiotics are generally considered safe for healthy individuals, although caution is advised in patients who are immunocompromised or critically ill. Clinicians should select probiotic products based on strain-specific clinical evidence, adequate viable doses, patient's characteristics, or patient’s sex. In conclusion, probiotics might play a role as adjunctive therapy for IBS and FC, with variability in responses influenced by microbial, host, and potential sex-related factors. Further research is needed to establish optimized personalized probiotic strategies.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have produced outcomes varying from no effect at all to high efficacy and durable effects over time. This review analyzed differences in the protocols used in FMT RCTs for IBS in the recently published literature with the aim of identifying the factors responsible for the success or failure of these RCTs. The results of this analysis might be useful in formulating an effective standard protocol for FMT in IBS. A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed database of the literature published in English from January 2015 to December 2023 using several search phrases comprising MeSH expressions. Those RCTs that carefully selected donors based on environmental factors that are known to affect the gut microbiota positively and ensured bacterial diversity before and during FMT produced successful outcomes. Furthermore, direct freezing of the donor’s fecal transplant, storing it at −80°C until the FMT is performed, and then thawing it at 4°C and mixing it manually appear to be factors associated with the success of FMT in IBS. Administering the donor’s fecal transplant into the small intestine results in durable effects of FMT and long-term colonization of beneficial bacteria. A standard protocol for FMT with large and durable effects should include (1) careful donor selection, (2) handling the donor’s fecal transplant in a way that preserves its microbiota contents, and (3) administering the transplant into the small intestine.

Probiotics have gained increasing clinical attention as adjunctive treatment for lower gastrointestinal disorders. However, evidence supporting their therapeutic efficacy remains limited, particularly with regard to sex-related differences. This expert review provides evidence-based insights and practical recommendations for the use of probiotics in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional constipation (FC), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), considering possible sex-related differences. Evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses indicates that probiotics can modestly improve global symptoms, abdominal pain, and bloating in IBS and enhance bowel movement frequency and stool consistency in FC. However, these effects are strain-specific and heterogeneous. Although clinical studies on probiotics in IBS have not confirmed significant sex-related differences, experimental animal studies using stress-induced IBS models have demonstrated sex-dependent responses to specific probiotic strains, supporting the biological plausibility of such differences. For CDI, the efficacy of probiotics in preventing primary or recurrent infections remains inconsistent across large trials, and current guidelines usually do not recommend their routine use. However, sex- and age-related immunologic differences support the clinical differences of CDI. Probiotics are generally considered safe for healthy individuals, although caution is advised in patients who are immunocompromised or critically ill. Clinicians should select probiotic products based on strain-specific clinical evidence, adequate viable doses, patient characteristics and sex. In conclusion, probiotics might play a role as adjunctive therapy for IBS and FC, with variability in responses influenced by microbial, host, and potential sex-related factors. Further research is needed to establish optimized personalized probiotic strategies.

Background: Cough is a prominent symptom of chronic respiratory diseases, including asthma, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and bronchiectasis (BE). Some patients develop chronic cough (CC), defined as lasting more than 8 weeks, yet its characteristics remain poorly understood. This study aimed to characterize CC across various chronic respiratory diseases using validated cough assessment tools. Methods: The Cough Assessment in Chronic Respiratory Diseases (COASESS) study, a multicenter, prospective cross-sectional study, was conducted at 10 university hospitals. CC was evaluated in terms of intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]), frequency (cough symptom score [CSS]), and quality of life (using the cough assessment test [COAT] and Leicester cough questionnaire [LCQ]). Cough hypersensitivity was assessed with the cough hypersensitivity questionnaire (CHQ). Data on age, sex, and smoking status were also collected. Results: Among the 303 enrolled patients, 266 with chronic respiratory diseases were included in the analysis. Patients with asthma were younger, predominantly female, and non-smokers, whereas those with COPD and IPF were older males who had previously smoked (p<0.001). Scores for COAT, LCQ, NRS, and CSS showed significant differences across the diseases, with asthma and IPF patients experiencing a greater symptom burden and lower quality of life compared to those with COPD or BE (p<0.001). Although CHQ total scores were similar across groups, asthma patients more frequently reported triggers such as talking and post-nasal drip. Conclusion This study revealed distinct characteristics of CC across different chronic respiratory diseases. Asthma and IPF were associated with a higher symptom burden, and cough hypersensitivity varied depending on the underlying condition. These findings highlight the necessity for disease-specific assessments and management strategies for CC.

Background: Asthma remission has recently emerged as an aspirational treatment goal, yet its definition remains inconsistent across studies and expert groups. The absence of a standardized framework hampers its application in clinical practice and research, particularly in Korea where biologics use is rapidly increasing. This study aimed to establish a consensus definition of clinical remission in severe asthma among Korean experts. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi survey, followed by a focused third round, was conducted among 28 board-certified pulmonologists from the Korean Academy of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases (KATRD). The questionnaire consisted of six domains and 27 items. Responses were analyzed using agreement rates, interquartile ranges, and content validity ratios to determine consensus levels. Results: Consensus was reached on defining clinical remission as a composite of no exacerbations, no systemic corticosteroid use, sustained symptom control (Asthma Control Test ≥20 on at least three occasions over 12 months), and stabilization and optimization of pulmonary function while on maintenance treatment. Experts agreed that pulmonary function should be assessed based on clinical judgment rather than absolute thresholds. Complete remission was additionally defined as fulfilling all clinical remission criteria with normalization of type 2 inflammation (blood eosinophils <300/μL and fractional exhaled nitric oxide <25 ppb). Conclusion This Delphi consensus provides a regionally relevant and pragmatic framework for defining remission in severe asthma. These statements may help guide clinical practice, inform guideline development, and support future research on remission as a treatment goal.

Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with upfront FOLFIRINOX followed by local-regional therapy (LRT), surgical resection (SR), and radiotherapy (RT). We aimed to identify specific patient subgroups for which RT may serve as a reasonable alternative to SR for local tumor control. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 116 patients (SR group, n= 70; RT group, n= 46) at a single center between 2015 and 2020. Survival outcomes were compared based on LRT modalities, focusing on identifying subgroups in which RT provided an efficacy comparable to that of SR. Results: Among 116 patients, the SR group achieved a significantly higher 5-year overall survival (OS) than the RT group (27.1% vs. 8.7%, P< 0.0001), despite similar progression-free survival (P= 0.23). Significant prognostic factors for OS included carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response in BRPC (P= 0.02) and radiologic partial response in LAPC (P= 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that, while SR provided a survival advantage in CA19-9 responders, no significant difference in OS was observed between SR and RT in CA19-9 non-responders (P= 0.37). Conclusion Although surgery remains the gold standard, RT may be considered a justifiable local alternative for CA19-9 non-responders and surgically ineligible patients with LAPC, yielding comparable outcomes in these specific, biologically unfavorable subgroups.