MR sialographic assessment of the masseter muscle and the ductal kinking in patients with recurrent parotitis.

Dysfunction of the masseter muscle may cause pathological kinking of the parotid duct leading to parotitis; MR sialography is a non-invasive radiological examination that allows to evaluate dynamically the ductal system of the parotid glands. In the present study we aimed to assess the relationships between Stensen's duct and masseter muscle and their implications in the aetiopathogenesis of recurrent parotitis secondary to masseter muscle dysfunction. Forty-one patients with recurrent unilateral parotitis and nine with bilateral recurrent parotitis, all with a clinical suspicious of masseter muscle hypertrophy due to bruxism were enrolled. They underwent ultrasonography as a first line examination and then MR sialography and sialendoscopy. Different anatomical features were studied. Involved parotid glands had a wider duct compared to contralateral unaffected parotid glands of patients with recurrent parotitis (p = 0.00134); male subjects with parotitis had a longer duct compared to the salivary glands of healthy patients (p = 0.00943 for affected glands and p = 0.00629 for the contralateral). A concordance between the evidence of an acute duct angle during sialendoscopy and a wider duct in patients with parotitis was observed although not statistically significant. These initial findings suggest that the masticatory muscle dysfunction related to bruxism seems to condition alteration of parotid duct course and anatomy thus favouring the occurrence of recurrent parotitis. A specific diagnostic iter based on clinical evaluation, dynamic ultrasonography and MR sialography, is therefore, mandatory to confirm the relationship between masseter muscle anatomy and parotid duct anomalies; this is the premise for an adequate therapeutic approach to underlying masticatory muscle disorder.

Evolving paradigms in breast cancer screening: Balancing efficacy, personalization, and equity.

Breast cancer remains a significant global health challenge, with projections indicating a troubling increase in incidence. Breast cancer screening programs have long been hailed as life-saving initiatives, yet their true impact on mortality rates is a subject of ongoing debate. Screening poses the risk of false positives and the detection of indolent tumors, potentially leading to overtreatment. Bias factors, including lead time, length time, and selection biases, further complicate the assessment of screening efficacy. Recent studies suggest that AI-driven image analysis may revolutionize breast cancer screening, maintaining diagnostic accuracy while reducing radiologists' workload. However, the generalizability of these findings to diverse populations is a critical consideration. Personalized screening approaches and equitable access to advanced technologies are essential to mitigate disparities. In conclusion, the breast cancer screening landscape is evolving, emphasizing the need for risk stratification, appropriate imaging modalities, and a personalized approach to reduce overdiagnosis and focus on cancers with the potential to impact lives while prioritizing patient-centered care.

Advances in breast cancer risk modeling: integrating clinics, imaging, pathology and artificial intelligence for personalized risk assessment.

Breast cancer risk models represent the likelihood of developing breast cancer based on risk factors. They enable personalized interventions to improve screening programs. Radiologists identify mammographic density as a significant risk factor and test new imaging techniques. Pathologists provide data for risk assessment. Clinicians conduct individual risk assessments and adopt prevention strategies for high-risk subjects. Tumor genetic testing guides personalized screening and treatment decisions. Artificial intelligence in mammography integrates imaging, clinical, genetic and pathological data to develop risk models. Emerging imaging technologies, genetic testing and molecular profiling improve risk model accuracy. The complexity of the disease, limited data availability and model inputs are discussed. A multidisciplinary approach is essential for earlier detection and improved outcomes.

Breast ductal lavage for biomarker assessment in high risk women: rationale, design and methodology of a randomized phase II clinical trial with nimesulide, simvastatin and placebo.

BACKGROUND: Despite positive results from large phase III clinical trials proved that it is possible to prevent estrogen-responsive breast cancers with selective estrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors, no significant results have been reached so far to prevent hormone non-responsive tumors. The Ductal Lavage (DL) procedure offers a minimally invasive method to obtain breast epithelial cells from the ductal system for cytopathologic analysis. Several studies with long-term follow-up have shown that women with atypical hyperplasia have an elevated risk of developing breast cancer. The objective of the proposed trial is to assess the efficacy and safety of a daily administration of nimesulide or simvastatin in women at higher risk for breast cancer, focused particularly on hormone non-responsive tumor risk. The primary endpoint is the change in prevalence of atypical cells and cell proliferation (measured by Ki67) in DL or fine needle aspirate samples, after 12 months of treatment and 12 months after treatment cessation. METHODS-DESIGN: From 2005 to 2011, 150 women with a history of estrogen receptor negative ductal intraepithelial neoplasia or lobular intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical hyperplasia, or unaffected subjects carrying a mutation of BRCA1 or with a probability of mutation >10% (according to BRCAPRO) were randomized to receive nimesulide 100mg/day versus simvastatin 20mg/day versus placebo for one year followed by a second year of follow-up. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized placebo controlled trial to evaluate the role of DL to study surrogate endpoints biomarkers and the effects of these drugs on breast carcinogenesis. In 2007 the European Medicines Agency limited the use of systemic formulations of nimesulide to 15 days. According to the European Institute of Oncology Ethics Committee communication, we are now performing an even more careful monitoring of the study participants. Preliminary results showed that DL is a feasible procedure, the treatment is well tolerated and the safety blood tests do not show any significant liver toxicity. There is an urgent need to confirm in the clinical setting the potential efficacy of other compounds in contrasting hormone non-responsive breast cancer. This paper is focused on the methodology and operational aspects of the clinical trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01500577).