Medical biosensors have set the basis of medical diagnostics, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) has boosted diagnostics to a great extent. However, false results are evident in every method, so it is crucial to identify the reasons behind a possible false result in order to control its occurrence. This is the first critical state-of-the-art review article to discuss all the commonly used biosensor types and the reasons that can give rise to potential false results. Furthermore, AI is discussed in parallel with biosensors and their misdiagnoses, and again some reasons for possible false results are discussed. Finally, an expert opinion with further future perspectives is presented based on general expert insights, in order for some false diagnostic results of biosensors and AI biosensors to be surpassed.

The emergence of digitalization and artificial intelligence has had a profound impact on society, especially in the field of medicine. Digital health is now a reality, with an increasing number of people using chatbots for prognostic or diagnostic purposes, therapeutic planning, and monitoring, as well as for nutritional and mental health support. Initially designed for various purposes, chatbots have demonstrated significant advantages in the medical field, as indicated by multiple sources. However, there are conflicting views in the current literature, with some sources highlighting their drawbacks and limitations, particularly in their use in oncology. This state-of-the-art review article seeks to present both the benefits and the drawbacks of chatbots in the context of medicine and cancer, while also addressing the challenges in their implementation, offering expert insights on the subject.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality among both men and women worldwide, underscoring the need for an effective treatment strategy. For early-stage non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], surgical resection is the standard treatment. Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery [RATS] and video-assisted thoracic surgery [VATS] are better than open thoracotomy because they are less invasive. Recent lung cancer screening programs are detecting NSCLC at earlier stages, which is expected to result in an increase in the number of NSCLC surgeries as early-stage cases are diagnosed. A limited number of randomized controlled trials have compared RATS and VATS in operable NSCLC. We conducted a literature review to summarize the available evidence on these two surgical techniques. The purpose of this study is to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of RATS and VATS in early-stage NSCLC patients. RATS shows lower conversion rates to thoracotomy (6.3% vs. 13.1% p < 0.01) and more thorough lymph node dissection than VATS (e.g., 7.5 vs. 5.6 stations, p < 0.001). However, RATS is linked to considerably higher costs (USD 22,582 vs. USD 17,874, p < 0.05) and longer operative times (median 241.7 vs. 214.4 min, p = 0.06). The two techniques exhibited minimal differences in postoperative complications and pain, while RATS patients experienced shortened hospital stays (4–5 vs. 5–6 days, p < 0.006). While the accuracy of staging and treatment planning is improved by the improved lymph node retrieval in RATS, the long-term survival rate is still uncertain.

Introduction: The clinical outcome of HER2-positive breast cancer patients changed with the use of anti-Her therapies, though it still remains an aggressive and fatal disease. Implementation of immune checkpoint inhibitors in HER2-positive Breast cancer is a concept supported by the reported biological and preclinical data. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the current literature involving immune checkpoint inhibitors alone or in combination with targeted therapies or chemotherapy finalized or running in HER2-positive breast cancer. Results: Twelve clinical trials and 2 case reports were identified in our study. Conclusion: The reported clinical trials highlight that checkpoint inhibition seems to be promising in metastatic, neoadjuvant, and adjuvant settings of HER2-positive breast cancer.

Background: The aim of the present interim analysis was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the generic clopidogrel besylate (CB) with the innovator clopidogrel hydrogen sulphate (CHS) salt in patient groups eligible to receive clopidogrel. Methods: A 2-arm, multicenter, open-label, phase 4 clinical trial. Consecutive patients (n=1,864) were screened and 1,800 were enrolled in the trial and randomized to CHS (n=759) or CB (n=798). Primary efficacy end point was the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke or death from vascular causes, and primary safety end point was rate of bleeding events as defined by Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. Results: At 6-months follow-up no differences were observed between CB and CHS in primary efficacy end point (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.71; p=0.57). Rates of BARC-1,-2,-3a and -5b bleeding were similar between the two study groups whereas no bleeding events according to BARC-3b, -3c, -4 and -5a were observed in either CHS or CB group. Conclusion: The clinical efficacy and safety of the generic CB is similar to that of the innovator CHS salt, thus, it can be routinely used in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events for a period of at least 6 months. (Salts of Clopidogrel: Investigation to ENsure Clinical Equivalence, SCIENCE study Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT02126982).

Background: Effective communication between doctors and patients is crucial, especially when delivering bad news that can impact a person's present and future expectations. However, acquiring optimal skills in breaking bad news requires the incorporation of multiple professional competencies that are acquired gradually through years of training. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of existing literature on medical education programs and interventions aiming to improve communication skills and to critically evaluate the effectiveness of such training. Patients and Methods: We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching PubMed and Scopus databases in February 2023, using the key words “medical education,” “breaking bad news,” and “end of life communication.” Results: Our search yielded 21 relevant studies, with 12 randomized studies indicating improvements in trainees found in PubMed, while four Scopus studies referred to workshops and seminars that increased participants’ confidence in various communication areas. Furthermore, eight studies referred to training courses on communication techniques that helped medical students and health professionals develop confidence in breaking bad news skills. One study utilized interactive theater and role play with professional actors to teach breaking bad news to medical students, which can be a potentially powerful tool for teaching breaking bad news during medical education. One study showed that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted health education due to social distancing. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that training physicians at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels in communication skills for breaking bad news can be beneficial for both physicians and patients. However, limitations exist in reaching definitive conclusions. As digital learning has emerged in health-care education during the post-COVID-19 period, digital solutions have also been examined for training in the communication of bad news.