Radiotherapy (RT) is a treatment method commonly used in oncology. A vast majority of patients undergoing RT suffer from radiation-induced skin injury (RISI), which results from complex biochemical reactions in the irradiated skin. Current strategies for preventing and managing RISI are insufficient for achieving full skin regeneration. Multiple studies have shown that alterations in the skin microbiome correlate with the development and severity of RISI. These studies suggest that dysbiosis is a crucial factor in promoting radiation-associated dermatitis. Targeting the skin microbiota presents a potential therapeutic approach that could significantly improve the quality of life for patients undergoing RT. This review aims to present current findings on the interplay between the skin microbiome and radiation-induced skin damage as well as to discuss potential therapeutic strategies for preventing and mitigating this condition.

Radiotherapy (RT) is a commonly used treatment method in oncology. A vast majority of patients undergoing RT suffer from radiation-induced skin injury (RISI), which results from complex biochemical reactions in the irradiated skin. Current strategies for preventing and managing RISI are insufficient for achieving full skin regeneration. Multiple studies have shown that alterations in the skin microbiome correlate with the development and severity of RISI. These studies suggest that dysbiosis is a crucial factor in promoting radiation-associated dermatitis. Targeting the skin microbiota presents a potential therapeutic approach that could significantly improve the quality of life for patients undergoing RT. This review aims to present current findings on the interplay between the skin microbiome and radiation-induced skin damage, as well as to discuss potential therapeutic strategies for preventing and mitigating this condition.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by pain, limited mobility, an increased risk of depression, and sleep disturbances, which significantly impact quality of life (QoL). Analyzing psychosocial and environmental factors can identify the most significant determinants of QoL in RA patients. Methods: We conducted a single-center cross-sectional observational study among RA patients with low disease activity (DAS28ESR ≤ 3.2) from September 2021 till May 2022 in a rheumatology clinic or biology ward during one-day follow-up visits. QoL in RA patients was analyzed using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument, Short Form (WHOQOL-BREF), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) using a backward stepwise multivariate regression model (heatmap). Results: A total of 116 patients were included, predominantly overweight females (76.7%), with a median disease duration of 19 years. Only 24% of patients had good sleep quality, while approximately 20% had risk factors for moderate to severe depression. WHOQOL-BREF scores indicated moderate physical health (median = 50), high psychological well-being (66.7), strong social relationships (75), a supportive environment (68.8), good overall QoL (75), and average overall health (50). The multivariate model revealed that younger patients (under 40 years of age), married individuals, and those with good sleep quality (as indicated by a low PSQI) had the highest scores in the various WHO-BREF domains. The physical activity level was positively correlated with overall QoL (p < 0.001) and overall health (p = 0.017). BMI and BDI values were negatively associated (pBMI < 0.05; pBDI < 0.001) with physical health (rBMI = −0.34; rBDI = −0.73), social relationships (rBMI = −0.19; rBDI = −0.73), psychological well-being (rBMI = −0.24; rBDI = −0.83), and overall health (rBMI = −0.26; rBDI = −0.46). Conclusions: This study shows that, in addition to appropriate treatment, maintaining good physical health, satisfying relationships, and ensuring quality sleep are crucial for improving the QoL of patients with RA.

Background: Susac syndrome is a rare, autoimmune, occlusive endotheliopathy that affects blood vessels in the central nervous system (CNS), retina, and inner ear. At initial medical evaluation, the classic triad of symptoms is present in less than one-third of patients, making diagnosis challenging. Methods: A brief review and retrospective analysis of the course, disease activity, exacerbations, and treatment of four patients with Susac syndrome. Results: The mean age of the patients was 25.8 years, and the average disease duration was 183.5 months +/- 90.65. The clinical triad was observed at the onset of the disease in only one patient. The first patient with predominant CNS symptoms was treated with prednisone, methotrexate, and sulfasalazine (IVIG and GCS i.v. were used during exacerbations). The next patient with exacerbation of ENT symptoms was treated with oral methylprednisolone (MP) and mycophenolate mofetil. The third patient had no clear predominance of any symptoms and responded well to azathioprine. The last patient presented mainly ophthalmological symptoms and was initially treated with cyclophosphamide (total dose 6200 mg) and IVIG. Later, azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil were introduced. Conclusions: The described cases highlight differences in the course of the disease and response to immunosuppressive therapy. Patients initially responded very well to high doses of GCS and IVIG. However, in addition to long-term remissions, relapses also developed. Therefore, individual treatment based on the principles of personalized medicine is necessary.

Introduction: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most commonly diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorders in children and adolescents. Various treatment methods are available for this condition, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. Pharmacotherapy is currently the most effective method of reducing the core symptoms of ADHD. The most commonly used medications include psychostimulants such as methylphenidate and amphetamines. Comparing the efficacy and safety of available medications is particularly important in order to select the appropriate treatment for individual. Aim of the study: The aim of our study is to review the available literature on the pharmacological treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and to summarize current knowledge. We presented the mechanisms of action, clinical efficacy, and safety profile of individual drugs used in the pharmacotherapy of ADHD. Methods and materials: We reviewed the literature available in the PubMed database using the following keywords: “ADHD treatment”; “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder treatment”; “Stimulants”; “Non-stimulants”; “Methylphenidate”; “Atomoxetine”; “ADHD”; “Bupropion”; ‘Modafinil’; “α-agonists”; “Lisdexamphetamine (LDX)”; “Mixed Amphetamine Salts”, “Clonidine”; “Viloxazine”; “Centanafadine” Conclusion: Pharmacotherapy is the most effective method of reducing the core symptoms of ADHD. Psychostimulants are currently considered the most effective and most commonly used drugs for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In cases of intolerance or contraindications to their use, non-stimulant medications are an alternative. New medications such as viloxazine and centanafadine also offer promising alternatives. Individualization of pharmacological treatment is crucial to achieve optimal results.

Introduction: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is an autoimmune disease that, because of its heterogeneity, presents clinicians with many therapeutic challenges. The hallmarks of its pathogenesis are vasculopathies, cutaneous or visceral fibrosis and the presence of scleroderma-related antibodies, however, the course of the disease is different in every case. Therefore it is important to adjust the treatment process individually to each patient's needs. In this manuscript we aim to describe options available for therapeutic management of SSc. Materials and methods: An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Library and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews. Search terms included “systemic sclerosis”, “methotrexate”, “mycophenolate mofetil” “cyclophosphamide”, “autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation”, “tocilizumab”, “nintedanib”, “belimumab”, “rituximab”, “abatacept”, “lenabasum” as keywords. The review focused on articles published in English from their inception until 2025. Conclusions: However, the disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are widely used in systemic sclerosis, currently the biological therapeutics are objects of dynamic researches due to their good benefit-risk ratio. Numerous biological drugs are implemented for alleviating the course of Interstitial Lung Disease as it remains main cause of death among SSc patients. Additionally, some clinical manifestations of SSc, including Raynaud phenomenon (RP) and Pulmonary Artery Hypertension (PAH) are treating rather symptomatically then causatively. We hope our manuscript contributed to better understanding of therapeutic approaches of systemic sclerosis.