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.

Background: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder characterized by erythema, papules, ocular symptoms, and heightened sensitivity. Patients with neurogenic symptoms such as burning or stinging remain particularly difficult to manage. Current guidelines often underrepresent energy-based devices (EBDs), pigmentary sequelae, psychosocial burden, and ocular comorbidities. Objective: To examine Korean dermatologists’ expert perspectives on rosacea management, focusing on skin sensitivity, neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary changes, psychosocial impact, ocular involvement, and EBD use. Methods: A web-based, 29-item survey was administered to 25 board-certified Korean dermatologists (May–June 2025). Quantitative and qualitative responses were analyzed. Results: Erythematotelangiectatic and papulopustular phenotypes with sensitivity skin predominated. EBDs (pulsed dye laser, intense pulsed light) were frequently used but limited by cost and sensitivity issues. Neurogenic symptoms were recognized but rarely treated with neuromodulators. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation was infrequent, yet monitoring was inconsistent.Psychosocial and ocular aspects were acknowledged but seldomly systematically addressed.Respondents expressed interest in emerging adjunctive treatments such as cold plasma, skin boosters, and holistic care approaches. Conclusion Korean dermatologists adopt individualized strategies for rosacea, yet practice gaps remain regarding neurogenic symptoms, pigmentary complications, and psychosocial and ocular comorbidities. Findings support the need for updated multidisciplinary, phenotype-driven guidelines aligned with real-world practice.

Background: Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli is among the most important multidrug-resistant pathogens causing bloodstream infections (BSIs).Cefotaximase (CTX-M) enzymes are the most common and highly diverse ESBL family in E.coli. CTX-M-15 in group CTX-M-1 and CTX-M-14 in group CTX-M-9 are the most extensively disseminated enzymes. Multidrug-resistant E. coli strains complicate empirical therapy and increase healthcare burden globally and in Korea. We investigated the molecular epidemiology, sequence types (STs), and ESBL genotypes of E. coli bloodstream isolates in Korea and identified clinical risk factors for cefotaxime resistance. Methods: We collected all non-duplicated isolates of E. coli and related clinical information from patients with BSIs at eight sentinel hospitals in the Korean Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (Kor-GLASS) collection network during 2017–2021. Duplicate isolates were removed to ensure representativeness of the data. Antimicrobial susceptibility was tested using disk diffusion tests, and multilocus sequence typing and betalactamase genotyping were performed. Results: Among 9,232 E. coli blood isolates, resistance rates to cefotaxime and ceftazidime were 36.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Among the clinical factors, age > 65 yrs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.36), hospital-origin infection (aOR, 2.55), and admission type (intensive care unit [ICU] vs. general ward; aOR, 1.34) were significant cefotaxime resistance risk factors. ST131 was the most prevalent among cefotaxime-resistant E. coli (64.8%, 2,180/3,363), followed by ST1193 (5.3%, N = 177), and ST69 (5.1%, N = 170).ST131, ST648, ST405, and ST410 cefotaxime-resistant E. coli isolates frequently harbored blaCTX-M-15, whereas ST1193 and ST68 showed a high proportion of blaCTX-M-27 carriers, and most ST457 and ST5150 isolates carried blaCTX-M-55. Conclusions Continuous monitoring of ESBL-producing E. coli is required to prevent further dissemination, guide empirical therapy, inform infection control policies, and ensure early detection of multidrug-resistant clones with the potential for widespread transmission.

Background: Rapid pathogen identification and antibiotic-susceptibility tests (ASTs) are important for treating bloodstream infections. We compared the performance of the QMAC-dRAST and BD Phoenix M50 direct AST (dPhoenix) systems using bacterial pellets prepared from positive blood culture broth and evaluated their impact on treatment modification. Methods: Direct AST results for 106 Enterobacterales isolates were retrospectively reviewed. Conventional broth microdilution was used to calculate categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME), major error (ME), and minor error (mE). For isolates showing high VMEs in both methods, supplementary tests were performed. Clinical impact was evaluated by calculating the time required to obtain AST results (time-to-result) and observing changes in antibiotics prescribed after performing ASTs. Results: Both systems showed acceptable overall CA, VME, ME, and mE values (QMACdRAST: 93.6%, 1.6%, 0.9%, and 5.3%, respectively; dPhoenix: 93.1%, 0.9%, 0.6%, and 6.2%, respectively). Piperacillin–tazobactam showed high VMEs with QMAC-dRAST (4/20, 20.0%) and dPhoenix (3/20, 15.0%). Colony AST on 13 isolates revealed that QMACdRAST testing yielded lower minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for piperacillin–tazobactam with three isolates, whereas dPhoenix testing yielded higher MICs with two isolates and lower MICs with two isolates. The average time-to-result was 20.8 hr and 30.1 hr for QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix, respectively (P < 0.001). After AST, the number of optimal treatments increased from 43 (46.7%) to 72 (78.3%) (P < 0.001). Conclusions The QMAC-dRAST and dPhoenix systems provided reliable AST results with a short time-to-result. However, we recommend performing complementary tests, such as the disk diffusion test, for piperacillin–tazobactam.

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer; however, predictive biomarkers for optimal patient selection remain unsatisfactory. This study was aimed at evaluating the predictive value of tumor mutational burden (TMB) and insertion/deletion (Indel) rate in patients with gastric cancer treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 132 patients with gastric cancer treated with first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and 185 patients treated with chemotherapy alone, all of whom had next-generation sequencing data available. The TMB and Indel cut-offs were set at 15.63 mutations per megabase and 18.19%, respectively, as determined based on their ability to best distinguish progression-free survival (PFS) among the patients who received nivolumab plus chemotherapy. Results: PFS was favorable for nivolumab and chemotherapy than for chemotherapy alone in both the high and low TMB groups; nevertheless, survival benefits were observed only in the high Indel group. Among the subgroups defined based on both TMB and Indel rates, the high TMB and high Indel rate subgroup showed the greatest benefit from nivolumab plus chemotherapy compared with that from chemotherapy alone. The benefit of this subgroup remained significant in patients with proficient mismatch repair (MMR) tumors, whose survival outcomes were comparable to those of patients with deficient MMR tumors.Among patients treated with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, high TMB and Indel rate were independently associated with favorable survival outcomes. Conclusions Thus, Indel rate, particularly in combination with TMB, may be a promising predictive biomarker for gastric cancer. However, further validation of their predictive value is warranted.

Purpose: Patient-derived cells (PDCs) and patient-derived organoids (PDOs) are complementary preclinical models widely used in translational cancer research. However, their molecular and functional differences have not been systematically characterized. This study established and analyzed paired PDC and PDO models derived from the same gastric cancer ascites to delineate platform-dependent molecular and functional profiles. Materials and Methods: Malignant ascites or pleural fluid obtained from 6 patients with advanced gastric cancer were used to establish paired PDC and PDO models. All pairs underwent comprehensive multi-omics profiling, integrating genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic data. Phenotypic characterization included morphological, histological, proliferative, and cell cycle analyses. Drug sensitivity assays were performed using 4 chemotherapeutic agents commonly used to treat gastric cancer. Results: The 6 paired PDC and PDO models exhibited distinct morphological characteristics.Whole-genome analyses demonstrated high concordance among primary tumors, PDCs, and PDOs, confirming tumor representation across platforms. Multi-omics profiling identified platform-dependent molecular signatures; PDOs were enriched for extracellular matrix remodeling and stemness, whereas PDCs displayed proliferation- and immune-related signatures. Clinically relevant biomarkers, including HER2 and MET alterations, were concordant with primary tumors. Notably, drug responses differed between platforms and patients, indicating platform-dependent and patient-specific chemosensitivity. Conclusions Paired PDC and PDO models derived from the same patients preserved core patient-specific tumor characteristics while exhibiting distinct molecular and functional profiles. These findings underscore the culture platform as a critical determinant of experimental outcomes and therapeutic responses. Therefore, careful selection of an appropriate preclinical model is essential to accurately address biological questions and optimize precision oncology strategies.

The gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is one of the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Between the 1990s and early 2000s, GIST was identified as a tumor characterized by KIT or PDGFRA mutations, resulting in imatinib being established as an effective targeted therapy. However, with advances in molecular diagnostics, approximately 10%–15% of GISTs have been reported to harbor alternative mutations, such as those in the succinate dehydrogenase subunit genes and BRAF, leading to the development of additional targeted therapies. GISTs exhibit a wide spectrum of clinical behaviors, ranging from indolent to highly aggressive, prompting the development of diverse risk classification systems. However, multiple systems remain in use, leading to inconsistent pathologic reports. Moreover, the mitotic counting method—a key factor in risk stratification—has become a major source of confusion among pathologists owing to the adoption of digital pathology and discrepancies between updated international guidelines and outdated reimbursement requirements. These inconsistencies have hindered pathologic reporting and communication between pathologists and clinicians. This review comprehensively overviews the historical background, molecular subtypes, and risk classification systems of GIST, focusing on evolving issues in mitotic rate evaluation and the application of risk classification systems in clinical practice.

Objective: To evaluate the performance of supplemental automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) added to mammography-based breast cancer screening for women with nondense breasts. Materials and Methods: A retrospective search of radiology databases at two tertiary institutions identified asymptomatic women with nondense breasts who underwent breast cancer screening using both digital mammography (DM) and supplemental ABUS between January 2020 and December 2023. We excluded women without sufficient follow-up data or those without an established final diagnosis, including histopathologic results. The performance measures of DM alone and ABUS combined with DM (ABUS plus DM) were compared. The primary outcome was the cancer detection rate (CDR), and the secondary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity. Subgroup analyses were performed for women with scattered fibroglandular density and almost entirely fatty breasts. Results: A total of 2,904 pairs of screening examinations were performed in 1,683 women (59 ± 10 years), detecting 26 cancers. In comparison with DM alone, ABUS plus DM showed higher CDR (9.0 vs. 7.9 per 1,000 examinations, P < 0.001), higher sensitivity (100% [26/26] vs. 88.5% [23/26], P < 0.001), and lower specificity (95.0% [2,735/2,878] vs. 97.9% [2,817/2,878], P < 0.001). In women with scattered fibroglandular density, ABUS increased the CDR from 7.4 to 8.5 per 1,000 examinations and improved the sensitivity from 87.0% [20/23] to 100% [23/23] (P < 0.001). In women with almost entirely fatty breasts, ABUS plus DM showed the same CDR (16.4 per 1,000 examinations) and sensitivity (100% [3/3]) as DM alone. Three cancers (11.5% [3/26]), all of which were stage T1N0, were detected only by supplemental ABUS. Conclusion Supplemental ABUS improved cancer detection and sensitivity in women with nondense breasts, with the benefits primarily observed in those with scattered fibroglandular density.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the association between exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) and the risk of parkinsonism according to the GBCA type. Materials and Methods: Individuals aged ≥40 years who underwent first-ever magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations between 2011 and 2014 were identified from the Korean nationwide population-based health insurance claims database and followed up until 2022. Individuals were divided into those who underwent at least one GBCA-enhanced MRI, and those who underwent only non-enhanced MRI. GBCA-exposed individuals were further categorized into those exposed only to linear or macrocyclic GBCAs, after excluding those exposed to both types. The primary event of interest was allcause parkinsonism. Secondary events included all-cause parkinsonism requiring medication, Parkinson’s disease (PD), atypical parkinsonism, and secondary parkinsonism. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models for exposure to linear and macrocyclic GBCAs, with the non-enhanced MRI group serving as a reference. The models were adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, alcohol consumption, regular exercise, body mass index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and comorbidities. Subgroup analyses were performed according to age, sex, renal function, and history of cancer. Results: A total of 222,977 individuals were included in this study. Among them, 92,230, 48,335, and 82,412 individuals underwent non-enhanced, linear GBCA-enhanced, and macrocyclic GBCA-enhanced MRI, respectively. Exposure to linear GBCAs slightly increased the risk of all-cause parkinsonism (adjusted HR, 1.13 [97.5% confidence interval, 1.08–1.19]), while exposure to macrocyclic GBCAs did not increase the risk (adjusted HR, 1.00 [97.5% confidence interval, 0.95–1.05]).The results were similar for all-cause parkinsonism requiring medication, PD, and secondary parkinsonism, whereas no significant association was observed for atypical parkinsonism. Conclusion Exposure to linear GBCAs may slightly increase the risk of parkinsonism in adults, whereas exposure to macrocyclic GBCAs may not. Caution should be exercised when using linear GBCAs until further evidence emerges.