Background and Objectives: The objective of this review is to evaluate the current evidence regarding hormone treatments for both premenopausal and postmenopausal women with early-stage hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer. Materials and Methods: An in-depth exploration of the existing literature was conducted, with landmark clinical trials such as TEXT, SOFT, ATLAS, and aTTom serving as primary references. Results: Through an extensive review of the literature, our findings indicate that for premenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative BC with a low risk of recurrence, standard 5-year monotherapy with tamoxifen represents the optimal therapeutic management, given its favorable clinical outcomes and lower associated toxicity. In contrast, for premenopausal women with an intermediate to high risk of recurrence with the same tumor characteristics, the most effective approach stated in the literature is a combination of ovarian suppression therapy (chemical/surgical) and an aromatase inhibitor/selective estrogen receptor modulator (tamoxifen), with a possible extension of the standard therapeutic period. In postmenopausal patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer with a low recurrence risk, the first line of treatment is usually a standard 5-year period of treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AIs)(letrozole, anastrozole, or exemestane). On the other hand, in postmenopausal women with an intermediate to high risk, combination therapy might be needed, as well as an extension of the standard therapeutic time. Conclusions: Treatment consensus depends on pre- vs. postmenopausal status and recurrence risk.

Breast cancer is a global health issue affecting countries worldwide, imposing a significant economic burden due to expensive treatments and medical procedures, given the increasing incidence. In this review, our focus is on exploring the distinct imaging features of known molecular subtypes of breast cancer, underlining correlations observed in clinical practice and reported in recent studies. The imaging investigations used for assessment include screening modalities such as mammography and ultrasonography, as well as more complex investigations like MRI, which offers high sensitivity for loco-regional evaluation, and PET, which determines tumor metabolic activity using radioactive tracers. The purpose of this review is to provide a better understanding as well as a revision of the imaging differences exhibited by the molecular subtypes and histopathological types of breast cancer.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent sustained arrhythmia worldwide and is now increasingly regarded as a disease of chronic inflammation and progressive atrial fibrosis. Understanding of molecular mechanisms that mediate the linkage between systemic metabolic dysregulation, inflammation, and structural atrial changes is crucial for informing risk stratification and targeting of prevention strategies. This review provides evidence from 105 studies focusing on the contributions of transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1), tumor necrosis factor-a (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), galectin-3, and galectin-1 to cardiac fibrogenesis, atrial fibrosis, and AF pathogenesis. We also link metabolic syndrome to these biomarkers and to atrial remodeling, as well as echocardiographic correlates of fibrosis. TGF-β1 is established as the central profibrotic cytokine and promotes Smad-based fibroblast activation, collagen accumulation, and structural atrial remodeling. Its role is highly potentiated by thrombospondin-1 by turning latent TGF-β1 into its potent form. TNF-α and IL-6 also play an integral role in the inflammatory fibrotic continuum by activating NF-κB and STAT3 signaling, promoting fibroblast proliferation, electrical uncoupling, and extracellular matrix accumulation. Galectin-3 is a potent profibrotic mediator that promotes TGF-β signaling and is a risk factor for negative outcomes, whereas Gal-1 seems to regulate inflammation resolution and may exert context-dependent protective or maladaptive roles. Metabolic syndrome is strongly associated with excessive levels of these biomarkers, chronic low-grade inflammation, oxidative stress, and ventricular and atrial fibrosis. Chronic clinical findings show that metabolic syndrome (MetS) increases AF risk, exacerbates atrial dilatation, and is associated with worse postoperative outcomes. Echocardiographic data are connected to circulating biomarkers and are non-invasive for evaluating atrial remodeling. The evidence to date supports that atrial fibrosis should be considered an end point of systemic inflammation, metabolic dysfunction, and activation of profibrotic molecular pathways. Metabolic syndrome, due to its chronic low-grade inflammatory environment and prolonged levels of metabolic stress, manifests as an important upstream factor of fibrotic remodeling, which continuously promotes the release of cytokines, oxidative stress, and fibroblast activation. Circulating fibrotic biomarkers, in comparison with metabolic syndrome, serve separate yet interdependent pathways that help orchestrate atrial structural remodeling through the simultaneous process but can also provide a long-term indirect measure of ongoing profibrotic activity. The integration of these biomarkers with superior atrial imaging enables a broader understanding of the fibrotic substrate of atrial fibrillation. This combined molecular imaging approach can facilitate risk stratification, refine therapeutic decisions, and facilitate early identification of higher-risk metabolic phenotypes, thus potentially facilitating directed antifibrotic and anti-inflammatory therapy in atrial fibrillation.

Introduction: Breast cancer has become one of the most serious and widespread public health concerns globally, affecting an increasing number of women—and, in rare cases, men—across the world. It is the most common cancer among women across all countries. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the influence of demographic factors, medical and reproductive history, diagnostic techniques, and hormone receptor status on the development and progression of breast cancer. Materials and Methods: A total of 687 female patients from Romania underwent standard breast examination techniques, including clinical breast examination, mammography, ultrasonography, and, ultimately, breast biopsy. Statistical analysis was performed using the R programming language and RStudio software. The study included a comparative analysis and a prediction analysis for malignancy and tumor size (cumulative histological dimension) through logistic and linear regression models. Results: The comparative analysis identified several variables associated with malignancy: older age (p < 0.001), non-vulnerability (p = 0.04), no daily physical activity (p = 0.002), no re-biopsy (p < 0.001), immunohistochemistry use (p < 0.001), use of larger gauge needles (p < 0.001), ultrasound-guided biopsy (p < 0.001), and vacuum biopsy (p < 0.001). The hormone receptor statuses—estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and androgen receptor (AR)—showed statistically significant differences in distribution across breast cancer B classifications. Logistic regression analysis identified ER, PR, and age as significant predictors of malignancy. Linear regression analysis revealed histopathological results, living environment, geographical region, vulnerability, prior breast examination, and the number of histological fragments as significant predictors of cumulative histological dimension. Conclusions: Our predictive models demonstrate the impact of demographic factors, medical history, diagnostic techniques, and hormone receptor status on breast cancer development and progression, accounting for a significant portion of the variance in malignancy and cumulative histological dimension.

Background/Objectives: Introduction: Breast cancer remains a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among women, and timely diagnosis is critical for improving outcomes. Organized screening programs strive to function efficiently, with minimal delays; however, evidence indicates that longer waiting times may be present at different stages of the diagnostic process. Few studies have evaluated how socio-demographic, reproductive, lifestyle, and clinical characteristics may influence diagnostic timeliness in a regional screening context. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 240 women who underwent breast biopsy following abnormal screening assessment, out of 24,000 patients enrolled in a regional breast cancer screening program conducted in Northeastern and Southeastern Romania. Diagnostic timeliness was observed across three consecutive intervals of the screening pathway: mammography to biopsy (T1), biopsy to histopathological confirmation (T2), and cumulative presentation-to-diagnosis time (T3). Baseline population characteristics were described, subgroup comparisons performed, and multivariable regression models applied to identify independent predictors of diagnostic delay and to explore interaction effects at different stages of the screening process. Results: The interval between mammography and biopsy accounted for the most substantial waiting times (T1 median 24 days). The cumulative time to diagnosis (T3) reached a median of 32 days. Territorial inequalities were the strongest determinant of delay: rural patients experienced approximately five additional days before histopathological confirmation compared with urban patients (p = 0.003). Social vulnerability further contributed to prolonged T1 and T3 intervals, while lifestyle, reproductive, and anthropometric factors showed only minor or inconsistent associations. Interaction analyses revealed that delays linked to rural residence were most pronounced among younger women, an age group at higher risk for aggressive subtypes such as triple-negative breast cancer. Conclusions: In our findings, regional background and social vulnerability outweighed individual risk factors in shaping total diagnostic time. These results support the careful monitoring of interval-specific performance to strengthen equitable access to biopsy among vulnerable populations, where the effectiveness of early breast cancer detection is often challenged.

Background/Objectives: The primary purpose of this study is to provide a more in-depth insight into various demographic, clinical, and lifestyle factors in relation to breast cancer and to predict the extent to which certain variables described as “predictors” might lead to further investigation. By analyzing a large cohort, we are able to provide valuable and up-to-date information on breast cancer screening, support breast specialists, and further enhance international screening guidelines. Methods: We screened for breast cancer in a population of women aged 50 to 69 years by using the standardized breast cancer imaging screening method (breast mammography) and ultrasonography as a complementary imagistic tool, and we compared the results with the gold standard, breast biopsy. For this, 58,760 women with no known history of breast cancer coming from 4 major regions of Romania (North-East, North-West, South-East, and West) were first evaluated through mammography. Out of these, 3197 women with positive mammograms subsequently underwent a breast ultrasound examination. The remaining 688 patients with positive breast ultrasound were further referred for a breast biopsy. Results: The statistical analysis revealed several predictors such as the body mass index (BMI), positive family medical history of breast cancer, age at first birth, and age at menopause that influenced the progression from mammography (first stage of the screening program) towards echography (additional imaging modality). Furthermore, we established that age, age at first birth, and BMI are significant predictors of progression from echography towards biopsy (the last stage of the screening program). Furthermore, by analyzing the number of positive biopsies (688) out of the total number of patients in the study (58,760), we calculated a total breast cancer detection rate of 8 per 1000 patients. Lastly, by studying the patient demographics in the context of breast cancer (BC) screening, we observed that participants coming from an urban environment presented a higher rate of positive mammographic results as compared to ones of rural provenience. Conclusions: Our study analyzed a large cohort of patients and offers real world data which shows that multiple factors were positively associated with an increased risk of BC. Older age, older age at first birth, and an older menopausal age are all estrogen-dependent risk factors that were linked with an increased breast cancer risk in our study. Furthermore, our findings concerning the rural/urban disparities and regional differences highlight the need for region-specific interventions to address lifestyle risk factors, improve healthcare access, and enhance breast cancer screening and follow-up protocols, particularly in underserved areas like the North-East and South-East regions.