Background/Objectives: Representing the most common malignancy worldwide, skin cancer requires timely detection to improve prognosis. Both educational level of the patients and health literacy are important variables in terms of prevention and diagnosis in early stages of the disease, but data from Central and Eastern Europe are limited. Methods: We realized a prospective observational study that included 76 patients who were diagnosed with skin cancer and treated at the “Prof. Dr. I. Chiricuță” Institute of Oncology in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Demographic, clinical, histopathological, and psychosocial data were collected in a standardized form. The primary aim was the measurement of diagnostic delay, defined as the interval since symptom onset until diagnosis. Secondary variables included education level, place of residence, participation in awareness campaigns and understanding capacity. Statistical analyses were applied. Results: The mean age in the cohort was 58.3 years; 52.6% were male and 84.2% were urban residents. The most frequent histological type was melanoma (47.4%), followed by basal cell carcinoma (36.8%), and squamous cell carcinoma (10.5%). The median delay in diagnostic was equal to 3 weeks. Education level was significantly related to earlier presentation (Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.043), with shorter delays noticed in patients with university or postgraduate degrees (compared to those with secondary education). However, there were no significant differences between patients with rural and urban provenience (p = 0.483). Patients’ capacity of understanding showed no correlation with diagnostic delay, but their prior participation in awareness campaigns was strongly associated with higher comprehension (p < 0.001). Also, skin self-examination did not significantly impact time to diagnosis (p = 0.86). Conclusions: Higher levels of education and patients’ exposure to awareness campaigns might represent predictors of shorter diagnostic delay, highlighting the impact of public health initiatives and targeted educational strategies to improve early detection of skin cancers in Romania. However, the findings must be interpreted in light of the study’s limitations, namely the relatively small sample size and single-center design.

Background/Objectives: Family physicians are key stakeholders in the implementation of cancer prevention strategies, including risk factor assessment, lifestyle counseling, and early detection. Despite this, integration of personalized prevention into routine practice remains limited. This study aimed to explore family physicians’ perspectives on barriers, training needs, and collaboration opportunities in cancer prevention. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted using an exploratory sequential design. The qualitative phase involved semi-structured interviews with 12 family physicians from the North-West Region of Romania. Thematic analysis was employed to identify main challenges and opportunities. Findings informed the development of a structured online survey completed by 50 family physicians. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were applied to assess trends and subgroup differences. Results: Interviews and survey data revealed multiple barriers to cancer prevention in primary care: insufficient consultation time, limited access to diagnostic tools, administrative workload, and low patient health literacy. Physicians reported moderate familiarity with personalized prevention but expressed strong interest in further training, particularly through flexible and interactive learning formats. Collaboration with cancer centers was considered suboptimal; participants emphasized the need for streamlined referral pathways and improved communication. Conclusions: The study highlights systemic and educational gaps affecting cancer prevention efforts in family medicine. Tailored training programs, digital integration with cancer centers, and targeted policy adjustments are needed to enhance prevention capacity within primary care.

Background/Objectives: Hybrid breast reconstruction (HBR), which combines implant-based reconstruction with autologous fat grafting (lipofilling), has emerged as a promising approach for improving both aesthetic and functional outcomes following mastectomy. This study aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q questionnaire before and after lipofilling, focusing on aesthetic satisfaction, physical well-being, and quality of care. Methods: This before–after study included patients who underwent prepectoral implant-based reconstruction followed by one session of lipofilling between November 2024 and May 2025. The BREAST-Q questionnaire was administered preoperatively and at three months postoperatively. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare changes across aesthetic, functional, and care-related domains. Results: A total of 96 patients completed both pre- and postoperative questionnaires. Statistically significant improvements (p < 0.01) were observed in most aesthetic and psychosocial parameters, including satisfaction with breast appearance (Q1), psychosocial well-being (Q2), sexual well-being (Q4), and satisfaction with surgical outcomes (Q5). Physical symptoms such as discomfort (Q3) decreased significantly postoperatively. Satisfaction with medical care remained high, with minor improvements noted. No oncologic recurrences were reported. Conclusions: Hybrid breast reconstruction using fat grafting after implant placement offers significant benefits in terms of aesthetics, symptom relief, and patient satisfaction. It is a safe and effective procedure that can be widely integrated into clinical practice, provided that patient selection and technique are carefully considered.

Objectives: Scarce data are available regarding preventive medicine in forcibly displaced populations especially regarding non-communicable diseases like neoplasia, while even more limited data are available on Ukrainian refugees in Romania. To address this research gap, the present analysis was performed to investigate Ukrainian refugee women’s beliefs, attitudes, and opinions towards the Romanian and Ukrainian healthcare system in a comparison model while focusing on the HPV immunization rates and factors influencing the uptake for themselves and their children. Methods: Participants were recruited using the snowball sampling method through their General Practitioner (GP) and a health mediator. Results: In total, 105 women completed the online or physical survey. The mean age was 50 years. In total, 40% of women had not been to a gynecological check-up in 3 or more years, and more than 56% had never been screened. Only four were vaccinated against HPV, and none remembered which type of vaccine was dispensed or how many doses were utilized. The primary hindrances to accessing health services or immunization programs were language barriers, financial burdens, and a lack of information. Respondents’ general distrust of health systems and healthcare workforces were recurrent themes. Relationship status, living arrangements, and previous engagement in screening practices influenced immunization rates. Perceiving the healthcare officials as proactive concerning optional vaccination programs such as HPV immunization and actively receiving recommendations drove respondents to pursue vaccination. Conclusions: This analysis offers a foundational insight into the specific needs of refugee women. It can guide the development of effective public health interventions to improve health outcomes and vaccination rates among Ukrainian refugees in Romania. Tailored preventive campaigns with adequate native language information and prompts from medical experts in designated centers should be deployed to ensure inclusive tactics for vulnerable populations.

Background/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown potential in patient education and integration into clinical decision support systems. However, its performance in counseling patients on breast reconstruction currently remains underexplored. This study’s objective is to compare AI-generated answers with expert surgeon responses to common patient questions (derived from clinical scenarios) in domains like oncological justification, reconstructive options, and postoperative care. Methods: We realized an observer-blinded study using five real-world clinical scenarios in the field of oncologic and reconstructive surgery of the breast. Both ChatGPT-5 (October 2025 version) and a senior board-certified plastic surgeon responded to frequently asked questions, which were split into three domains: (1) oncological and surgical justification; (2) reconstruction options and outcomes, respectively; and (3) postoperative period. The answers were evaluated by another senior plastic surgeon using a four-grade ordinal scoring system (1 = unsatisfactory, 4 = excellent), which assessed accuracy, completeness, safety, nuance, and alignment with the current guidelines. Results: Across a total of 40 questions, the average AI response score was 3.1 ± 0.6. Domain-specific items scored lowest values for oncological justification (2.8 ± 0.7) and higher values for reconstruction options/outcomes and postoperative care (both 3.2 ± 0.4). No AI response was graded as unsatisfactory (score 1). Responses graded 4 (15%) were considered comprehensive, accurate, and patient-friendly. Conclusions: Globally, ChatGPT-5 provides satisfactory, readable, and medically accurate answers to basic patient questions on breast reconstruction, with a few limitations in nuanced oncological justification.

In patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma, BRAF mutation assessment is routinely performed to identify patients who may benefit from BRAF-targeted therapy. This study aimed to assess the role of BRAF mutation status in relation to histopathological characteristics and survival of patients with stage II and III malignant melanoma. A prospective cohort of 108 patients with pT3 malignant melanoma who were treated in a comprehensive cancer center were included in the analysis. All patients were treated according to contemporary melanoma management guidelines between 2016 and 2024, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months extending to 2025. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses were performed in the study cohort. The study included 108 patients with stage II–III malignant melanoma, with a mean age of 56.73 ± 13.51 years. Superficial spreading melanoma was the most frequent histological subtype, followed by nodular and acral melanoma. Most tumors were classified as Clark level IV, with a median Breslow thickness of 3 mm, and ulceration was present in the majority of cases. Lymph node involvement was observed in over half of the patients, and BRAF mutations were identified in 56.48% of cases (the most common variant was V600E). Brisk tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were significantly more frequent in BRAF wild-type tumors compared with BRAF-mutant tumors. When assessing associations with survival, BRAF mutation status was not found to be an independent predictor. In the multivariate Cox model, TIL status was associated with improved OS (HR 3.33, 95% CI 1.41–7.88, p = 0.006). In addition, in the multivariate analysis, TIL status was also associated with improved PFS (HR 5.23, 95% CI 2.22–12.3, p < 0.001). BRAF wild-type tumors were significantly more likely to exhibit a brisk infiltrate. BRAF mutation status was not found to be an independent predictor of survival. TIL status remained significantly associated with OS and PFS in multivariable analysis.