Nanomedicine could improve the treatment of diabetes by exploiting various therapeutic mechanisms through the use of suitable nanoformulations. For example, glucose-sensitive nanoparticles can release insulin in response to high glucose levels, mimicking the physiological release of insulin. Oral nanoformulations for insulin uptake via the gut represent a long-sought alternative to subcutaneous injections, which cause pain, discomfort, and possible local infection. Nanoparticles containing oligonucleotides can be used in gene therapy and cell therapy to stimulate insulin production in β-cells or β-like cells and modulate the responses of T1DM-associated immune cells. In contrast, viral vectors do not induce immunogenicity. Finally, in diabetic wound healing, local delivery of nanoformulations containing regenerative molecules can stimulate tissue repair and thus provide a valuable tool to treat this diabetic complication. Here, we describe these different approaches to diabetes treatment with nanoformulations and their potential for clinical application.

Neuroblastoma cells highly express the disialoganglioside GD2, a tumor-associated carbohydrate antigen, which is also expressed in neurons, skin melanocytes, and peripheral nerve fibers. Immunotherapy with monoclonal anti-GD2 antibodies has a proven efficacy in clinical trials and is included in the standard treatment for children with high-risk neuroblastoma. However, the strong neuro-toxicity associated with anti-GD2 antibodies administration has hindered, until now, the possibility for dose-escalation and protracted use, thus restraining their therapeutic potential. Strategies to increase the efficacy of anti-GD2 antibodies are actively sought, with the aim to enable chronic treatments that could eradicate minimal residual disease and subsequent relapses, often occurring after treatment. Here, we report that Nanofenretinide and Nanospermidine improved the expression of GD2 in neuroblastoma cells (CHP-134) and provided different effects in combination with the anti-GD2 antibody naxitamab. In particular, Nanofenretinide significantly increased the cytotoxic effect of naxitamab while Nanospermidine inhibited cell motility at extents proportional to naxitamab concentration. In neuroblastoma cells characterized by a low and heterogeneous basal expression of GD2, such as SH-SY5Y, which may represent the cell heterogeneity in tumors after chemotherapy, both Nanofenretinide and Nanospermidine increased GD2 expression in approximately 50% of cells, thus shifting the tumor population towards improved sensitivity to anti-GD2 antibodies.

Thyroid nodules are a common clinical finding, with their prevalence influenced by multiple environmental and occupational factors, including exposure to ionizing radiation. Healthcare workers, particularly those operating in radiology, nuclear medicine, interventional cardiology, and radiation oncology, are potentially at increased risk due to chronic low-dose radiation exposure. This review aims to evaluate the current evidence regarding the association between occupational radiation exposure and the development of thyroid nodules among healthcare professionals. The findings suggest a higher prevalence of thyroid nodules in radiation-exposed workers compared to the general population, although data heterogeneity and methodological limitations exist. Factors such as the duration of exposure, radiation protection practices, and frequency of monitoring play critical roles in modulating the individual risk. While some studies report no significant difference in malignancy rates, the increased detection of nodules underlines the need for regular thyroid surveillance in at-risk populations. Further longitudinal and multicentric studies are warranted to clarify the causality and guide preventive strategies. This review highlights the importance of occupational health protocols, including radiation shielding and periodic thyroid evaluation, in safeguarding the long-term endocrine health of healthcare workers.

Background: Fasting plasma glucose, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and oral glucose tolerance testing remain central to the diagnosis and monitoring of dysglycemia, but they mainly reflect the average glycemic exposure or discrete time-point measurements and may not capture intraday and interday glucose fluctuations. Glycemic variability (GV) has been associated with oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, inflammation, and diabetes-related complications, although much of the evidence derives from experimental, clinical, and diabetes-care settings rather than occupational cohorts. Aim: This narrative review examines the physiological basis, measurement, and potential occupational relevance of GV and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in working populations. Methods: Literature was narratively selected from biomedical databases, major guidelines, consensus statements, and occupational-health sources, prioritizing reviews, clinical guidelines, cohort studies, mechanistic studies, and CGM studies. No systematic search, risk-of-bias assessment, or quantitative synthesis was performed. Main findings: CGM is an established technology in selected diabetes-care contexts and provides metrics such as coefficient of variation, time in range, time above range, and time below range. Its use in occupational medicine, however, remains investigational outside selected clinical circumstances. Work-related factors such as shift work, circadian disruption, sleep loss, psychosocial stress, irregular meal timing, sedentary behavior, and variable physical workload may influence glucose regulation, but direct evidence linking these exposures to CGM-measured GV in workers remains limited. Implications: Potential applications include research on occupational determinants of metabolic health, monitoring of workplace lifestyle interventions, and individualized management of workers with diabetes in safety-sensitive roles, provided that consent, confidentiality, clinical follow-up, equity, and data-governance safeguards are ensured. Conclusions: GV assessment may complement traditional metabolic markers in selected occupational-health contexts, but routine CGM-based surveillance of general worker populations is not currently supported by sufficient evidence. Further longitudinal and interventional studies are required.