Follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC) is the second most common cancer of the thyroid gland, accounting for up to 20% of all primary malignant tumors in iodine-replete areas. The diagnostic work-up, staging, risk stratification, management, and follow-up strategies in patients who have FTC are modeled after those of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC), even though FTC is more aggressive. FTC has a greater propensity for haematogenous metastasis than PTC. Furthermore, FTC is a phenotypically and genotypically heterogeneous disease. The diagnosis and identification of markers of an aggressive FTC depend on the expertise and thoroughness of pathologists during histopathological analysis. An untreated or metastatic FTC is likely to de-differentiate and become poorly differentiated or undifferentiated and resistant to standard treatment. While thyroid lobectomy is adequate for the treatment of selected patients who have low-risk FTC, it is not advisable for patients whose tumor is larger than 4 cm in diameter or has extensive extra-thyroidal extension. Lobectomy is also not adequate for tumors that have aggressive mutations. Although the prognosis for over 80% of PTC and FTC is good, nearly 20% of the tumors behave aggressively. The introduction of radiomics, pathomics, genomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics, and liquid biopsy have led to improvements in the understanding of tumorigenesis, progression, treatment response, and prognostication of thyroid cancer. The article reviews the challenges that are encountered during the diagnostic work-up, staging, risk stratification, management, and follow-up of patients who have FTC. How the application of multi-omics can strengthen decision-making during the management of follicular carcinoma is also discussed.

Cancer disparities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) arise from multifaceted interactions between environmental exposures, infectious agents, and systemic inequities, such as limited access to care. The exposome, a framework encompassing the totality of non-genetic exposures throughout life, offers a powerful lens for understanding these disparities. In LMICs, populations are disproportionately affected by air and water pollution, occupational hazards, and oncogenic infections, including human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and neglected tropical diseases, such as schistosomiasis. These infectious agents contribute to increased cancer susceptibility and poor outcomes, particularly in immunocompromised individuals. Moreover, climate change, food insecurity, and barriers to healthcare access exacerbate these risks. This review adopts a population-level exposome approach to explore how environmental and infectious exposures intersect with genetic, epigenetic, and immune mechanisms to influence cancer incidence and progression in LMICs. We highlight the critical pathways linking chronic exposure and inflammation to tumor development and evaluate strategies such as HPV and HBV vaccination, antiretroviral therapy, and environmental regulation. Special attention is given to tools such as exposome-wide association studies (ExWASs), which offer promise for exposure surveillance, early detection, and public health policy. By integrating exposomic insights into national health systems, especially in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and South Asia, LMICs can advance equitable cancer prevention and control strategies. A holistic, exposome-informed strategy is essential for reducing global cancer disparities and improving outcomes in vulnerable populations.

Cancer is the leading cause of death in adults and majority of cancers involve abdominal and pelvic organs. Radiotherapy is used in the management of around half of patients who have abdominal and pelvic malignancies and 70% of the treated patients will develop radiation enteritis. The onset of radiation enteritis may delay the completion of treatment or lead to life-threatening conditions such as bowel perforation or obstruction. High-dose ionizing radiation can affect all the layers of the small intestine leading to weakening of its structural integrity, dysbiosis, malabsorption, and derangement of the innate immunity. Advances in the management of cancer has not led to an improvement in the treatment of radiation enteritis as the available preventative or treatment options are still ineffective. Severe acute and chronic radiation enteritis result from the damage to the crypt-based intestinal stem cells and their derivatives, which include the Paneth cells. Paneth cells regulate the proliferation and differentiation of the intestinal stem cells. The other roles of the Paneth cells are protection and nourishment of the intestinal stem cells, and control of the gut microbiota. Paneth cells can also de-differentiate and replace irreversibly damaged intestinal stem cells. This article reviews the anatomy of the epithelium of the small intestine and the intestinal epithelial cells including the Paneth cells. The effect of ionizing radiation on the intestinal stem cells and its derivatives, and the knowledge can be used to develop effective treatment of radiation enteritis is discussed.

Background and Objectives: Diabetic foot sepsis (DFS) accounts for approximately 60% of hospital admissions in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Individuals with DM are at risk of severe COVID-19. This study investigated factors associated with major amputation and mortality in patients admitted with DFS during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: Demographic information, COVID-19 and HIV status, clinical findings, laboratory results, treatment and outcome from records of patients with diabetic foot sepsis, were collected and analysed. Supervised machine learning algorithms were used to compare their ability to predict mortality due to diabetic foot sepsis. Results: Overall, 114 records were found and 57.9% (66/114) were of male patients. The mean age of the patients was 55.7 (14) years and 47.4% (54/114) and 36% (41/114) tested positive for COVID-19 and HIV, respectively. The median c-reactive protein was 168 mg/dl, urea 7.8 mmol/L and creatinine 92 µmol/L. The mean potassium level was 4.8 ± 0.9 mmol, and glycosylated haemoglobin 11.2 ± 3%. The main outcomes included major amputation in 69.3% (79/114) and mortality of 37.7% (43/114) died. AI. The levels of potassium, urea, creatinine and HbA1c were significantly higher in the deceased. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in the rate of major amputation and mortality in patients with DFS. The in-hospital mortality was higher in patients above 60 years of age who tested positive for COVID-19. The Random Forest algorithm of ML can be highly effective in predicting major amputation and death in patients with DFS.

Background: Diabetic foot sepsis (DFS) is the leading cause of lower extremity amputations and timely initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is paramount during its management. This study investigated causative microorganisms and their antimicrobial susceptibility profile in patients with DFS. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on patients who were 18-years and older admitted with DFS. Data collected included demographic information, comorbidities, clinical findings, types of specimens collected and results of microscopy, culture, and sensitivity (MC&S), treatment, and outcomes. Results: One hundred and sixty-eight records were found, of which 64.3% were of male patients. The median (IQR) age of males was 58 years (IQR 54–65) compared to 61 years (IQR 54–67) for females. Results of MC&S were available in 63.1% of the records, and E. faecalis was cultured in 16%, P. mirabilis in 10%, and S. aureus in 8% of cases. Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid was prescribed in 69% of the cases. Resistance to at least one antimicrobial was shown in 88% of S. aureus and 80% of P. mirabilis species. Conclusions: The commonly cultured organisms in patients with DFS were E. faecalis 16%, P. mirabilis 10%, and S. aureus. Amoxicillin/Clavulanic was prescribed empirically in 69% of the cases despite high rates of resistance, and in 37% treatment was not preceded by collection of specimens for MC&S. We therefore recommend collection of specimens for MC&S before initiation of antimicrobial therapy in all patients with DFS.

Background/Objective: Prevention of foot ulceration is critical to reduce the amputation rate in individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM). We investigated the knowledge of diabetic foot care management and prevention of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) among categories of healthcare practitioners (HCPs). Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional observational study was conducted at public healthcare facilities within the Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital Cluster in Gauteng, South Africa. Participants included podiatrists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians, medical orthotists and prosthetists, nurses, and medical doctors. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire that assessed knowledge of DFU risk factors, foot examination, foot care, and appropriate footwear. Knowledge level was classified as extremely poor if less than 50% of participants from a category of HCPs answered appropriately, reasonable for 50–59%, average at 60–69%, above average from 70–79%, and excellent when ≥80%. The questionnaire was completed by 449 HCPs and analyzed using STATA version 15, with statistical significance set at a p-value less than 0.05. Results: A total of 449 HCPs participated, which comprised the following: 48.1% (216) therapeutic health practitioners (THPs), 37.4% (168) nurses, and 14.5% (65) medical doctors. Only 36% (162) of participants had prior education on DFU. The overall knowledge levels among participants were risk factors of DFU (80%), foot examination (80%), identification of limb-threatening conditions (82%), foot care (77%), and footwear (65%). Medical doctors had the highest median scores for risk factors (85) and foot examination (80), followed by nurses (80 for risk factors and 78 for foot examination). THPs had the lowest median scores for risk factors (78) and foot examinations (70). Differences in knowledge levels across HCPs were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusions: THPs have insufficient knowledge of diabetic foot care and prevention of DFUs. Comprehensive training and targeted educational programs are needed to fill these gaps and improve patient care.