Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to evaluate treatment efficacy for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of 11 promising targets among adults with MASLD.

PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Embase were searched from inception to November 20, 2024. The primary outcomes were fibrosis improvement ≥1 stage without worsening of steatohepatitis and steatohepatitis resolution without worsening of fibrosis. Additional outcomes included reductions in liver fat content, liver enzymes, metabolic profiles, and selected safety outcomes. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank efficacy.

Of 11,584 articles screened, 44 eligible RCTs (11,410 participants, 33 medications) were included. For fibrosis improvement, d-(R)-pioglitazone (SUCRA: 79.3) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 21 analogs (SUCRA: 71.9) ranked higher. For steatohepatitis resolution, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) dual receptor agonists (RAs) (SUCRA: 91.7) ranked higher. Co-agonists of GLP-1/GIP/GCG and GLP-1/GCG receptors ranked higher for relative and absolute changes in liver fat content, respectively. For liver enzymes and glucose improvement, the combination of a GLP-1 RA and an acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase inhibitor ranked higher. GLP-1 RAs, peroxisome proliferator-activated RAs, and FGF21 analogs showed favorable effects on lipid profile improvement.

Incretin-based co-agonists and FGF21 analogs showed favorable profiles across key endpoints, while d-(R)-pioglitazone and GLP-1/GIP dual RAs ranked higher for fibrosis improvement and steatohepatitis resolution, respectively. SUCRA rankings should be interpreted in conjunction with effect sizes, uncertainty, and available safety data.

The clinical and genetic characteristics of TMED3, a p24-family protein, across different cancer types remain incompletely understood. This study aimed to evaluate its expression patterns, prognostic relevance, epigenetic regulation, immune associations, genetic alterations, functional networks, and chemical-gene interactions across six cancer types.

Public, de-identified data from UALCAN, GENT2, the Human Protein Atlas (HPA), Kaplan-Meier Plotter, MEXPRESS, cBioPortal, TIMER2.0, the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD), STRING, and DAVID were analyzed. The clinical and genetic characteristics of TMED3 in bladder cancer (BLCA), head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSC), kidney renal clear cell carcinoma (KIRC), kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma (KIRP), liver hepatocellular carcinoma (LIHC), and lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) were analyzed. Database-reported nominal P-values were used because unified multiple-testing correction was not feasible.

In UALCAN analysis, TMED3 mRNA was upregulated in BLCA, KIRP, LIHC, KIRC, and LUAD and downregulated in HNSC. HPA data showed higher TMED3 protein expression in BLCA, HNSC, and LUAD. Kaplan-Meier Plotter analysis showed that higher TMED3 expression was associated with shorter overall survival in HNSC, KIRC, KIRP, LIHC, and LUAD, but not in BLCA, and was not significantly associated with recurrence-free survival in any of the six cancers. MEXPRESS analysis suggested an inverse association between promoter methylation and TMED3 expression. TIMER analysis showed negative correlations between TMED3 expression and CD8+ T-cell infiltration in BLCA, HNSC, and LUAD, but a positive correlation in LIHC. cBioPortal showed low TMED3 alteration frequencies across the six cancers, and STRING and DAVID analyses linked TMED3-associated genes mainly to endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi trafficking and vesicle-mediated transport pathways. CTD analysis identified azacitidine, doxorubicin, and MK-2206 as chemicals associated with altered TMED3 expression.

TMED3 is a cancer-type-specific prognostic candidate associated with shorter overall survival in five of the six analyzed cancers. Its transcript-protein discordance, methylation pattern, and immune correlations define testable biological hypotheses, but independent experimental and clinical validation is required before clinical application.

High-throughput transcriptomic technologies have made differential gene expression analysis a cornerstone of cancer research by generating extensive lists of differentially expressed genes across tumor types and conditions. However, such lists provide limited biological insight without functional and mechanistic interpretation. This review examines the transition from descriptive gene expression profiles to a mechanistic understanding of cancer biology. We discuss integrative approaches that place expression changes within signaling pathways, transcriptional regulatory networks, and protein–protein interaction networks, thereby helping to identify functional modules and candidate upstream regulators. We emphasize the context-dependent nature of gene expression, which is shaped by genetic alterations, epigenetic landscapes, microenvironmental signals, and cellular heterogeneity. We also examine methodological advances, including gene set enrichment analysis, network-based modeling, and integration of genomic, epigenomic, proteomic, metabolomic, and single-cell transcriptomic data. Case studies across cancer types illustrate how mechanistic analyses can reveal context-specific transcriptional programs associated with oncogenic signaling, tumor suppression, metabolic reprogramming, epithelial–mesenchymal transition, and tumor–immune interactions. We highlight potential translational applications, including candidate biomarker discovery, prioritization of druggable targets, rational design of combination therapies, and investigation of therapeutic resistance. Finally, we discuss current challenges and emerging technologies, such as spatial transcriptomics and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based perturbation screens, that are advancing the field toward dynamic, systems-level models of tumor biology. Integrating computational analyses with experimental validation can help translate transcriptomic data into clinically relevant hypotheses for precision oncology and personalized cancer therapy.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) genotype C is common in East Asia and is associated with poor outcomes, particularly liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinically, genotype C infection has been associated with persistent viral replication, delayed HBeAg seroconversion, more active hepatic inflammation, and an increased risk of HCC. Current evidence suggests that these features are driven by several key molecular events, including the A1762T/G1764A double mutation in the basal core promoter, the G1896A mutation in the precore region, abnormal hepatitis B virus X protein function, and viral integration. Together, these changes may reshape viral transcription, antigen expression, host immune interactions, and oncogenic signaling, thereby contributing to disease progression and hepatocarcinogenesis. Other factors, such as epigenetic changes, dysregulated DNA damage responses, impaired tumor protein p53 function, and disrupted autophagy, may also be involved, although their exact roles remain unclear. Notably, even after effective viral suppression with potent nucleos(t)ide analogs, patients with genotype C may still have a relatively high residual risk of HCC. This review summarizes the molecular virological features, pathogenic mechanisms, immune dysregulation, and clinical significance of HBV genotype C, and discusses the potential value of genotype information in risk stratification, long-term surveillance, and clinical assessment of chronic hepatitis B.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is characterized by esophageal dysfunction and ≥15 eosinophils/high-power field on biopsy. The specific clinicopathologic characteristics and therapeutic outcomes of patients with concurrent gastric Helicobacter pylori infection and EoE remain poorly defined. This observational cohort study reexamines this relationship and evaluates the clinicopathologic features and outcomes of patients with concurrent diseases.

We retrospectively reviewed esophageal and gastric biopsies obtained between January 1, 2022, and December 30, 2025. Patients with a first-time diagnosis of EoE and concurrent treatment-naive gastric H. pylori infection were identified and confirmed by morphology and immunohistochemistry. Patients with a history of prior H. pylori eradication therapy or eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease were excluded. Clinical, pathologic, and follow-up data were analyzed.

Among 5,443 patients undergoing concurrent esophageal and gastric biopsy evaluation, 197 (3.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1–4.1%) met the diagnostic criteria for EoE, and 286 (5.3%, 95% CI, 4.7–5.9%) had gastric H. pylori infection. Twenty-eight patients with concurrent EoE and gastric H. pylori infection were initially identified, corresponding to an H. pylori prevalence of 14.2% (28/197) among patients with EoE. A significant association was identified between EoE and H. pylori infection (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.11–4.87; Fisher’s exact test, P < 0.001). After exclusion of 1 patient with eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease and 3 patients with prior H. pylori treatment, 24 patients met the study inclusion criteria for the subsequent clinicopathologic analysis. Among these 24 patients (M:F = 7:1; mean age, 29.5 years; range, 8–82 years), 8 (33%) were children. The most common presentations (n = 18, 75%) were abdominal pain in children and dysphagia in adults. Atopy was present in 7 (29%) patients. Histologically, 5 (21%) cases exhibited classic features, while 19 (79%) showed nonclassic features with lower eosinophil density and a more uniform distribution of eosinophils within the epithelium. Among 10 patients with follow-up, 3/10 (30%) achieved resolution of both H. pylori infection and EoE after H. pylori eradication therapy with or without steroids; 5/10 (50%) had persistent H. pylori infection and persistent or recurrent EoE; 2(20%) achieved H. pylori-negative status but had persistent EoE; and fungal infection developed in 2 of 4 patients (50%) treated with steroids.

H. pylori infection may be associated with a nonclassic pattern of EoE. Recognition of this pattern may have implications for diagnosis and management.

Bioactive peptides encrypted within food proteins and released by enzymatic hydrolysis or gastrointestinal digestion represent potential functional ingredients. Amaranth is an underutilized pseudocereal with a balanced amino acid profile and a protein composition that may yield peptides with diverse biological activities. However, translation of amaranth-derived peptides remains limited by low or uncertain bioavailability, variable yields, extraction and purification challenges, incomplete sequence identification, insufficient genotype screening, limited understanding of structure-activity relationships, and scarce in vivo and clinical validation. This review summarizes current evidence on the production, characterization, and pharmacological potential of amaranth-derived bioactive peptides. Enzymatic hydrolysis, fermentation, gastrointestinal digestion, and protein engineering have generated peptide fractions or sequences with antioxidant, antimicrobial, angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitory, dipeptidyl peptidase IV-inhibitory, hypocholesterolemic, anti-inflammatory, antithrombotic, and anticancer activities, primarily in in silico, biochemical, cell-based, and animal models. Analytical workflows involving chromatographic separation, mass spectrometry, and bioinformatic prediction have improved peptide discovery, but results remain difficult to compare because processing conditions and activity assays are not standardized. Available evidence suggests that amaranth proteins are promising sources of multifunctional peptides; nevertheless, these findings do not yet establish clinical efficacy. Future work should optimize extraction and identification methods, clarify sequence-structure-activity relationships, evaluate stability and intestinal absorption, compare genotypes and non-seed tissues, and conduct well-designed in vivo studies, safety assessments, and clinical trials. Scalable processing and formulation strategies will also be required before amaranth-derived peptides can be developed as reliable functional food, nutraceutical, or pharmaceutical ingredients.