Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with high recurrence rates, high incidence of distant metastases, and poor overall survival (OS). Taxane and anthracycline-containing chemotherapy (CT) is currently the main systemic treatment option for TNBC, while platinum-based chemotherapy showed promising results in the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings. An early arising of intrinsic or acquired CT resistance is common and represents the main hurdle for successful TNBC treatment. Numerous mechanisms were uncovered that can lead to the development of chemoresistance. These include cancer stem cells (CSCs) induction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, hypoxia and avoidance of apoptosis, single factors such as tyrosine kinase receptors (EGFR, IGFR1), a disintegrin and metalloproteinase 10 (ADAM10), and a few pathological molecular pathways. Some biomarkers capable of predicting resistance to specific chemotherapeutic agents were identified and are expected to be validated in future studies for a more accurate selection of drugs to be employed and for a more tailored approach, both in neoadjuvant and advanced settings. Recently, based on specific biomarkers, some therapies were tailored to TNBC subsets and became available in clinical practice: olaparib and talazoparib for BRCA1/2 germline mutation carriers larotrectinib and entrectinib for neurotrophic tropomyosin receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusion carriers, and anti-trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop2) antibody drug conjugate therapy for heavily pretreated metastatic TNBC (mTNBC). Further therapies targeting some pathologic molecular pathways, apoptosis, miRNAS, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), insulin growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R), and androgen receptor (AR) are under investigation. Among them, phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (Akt)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and EGFR inhibitors as well as antiandrogens showed promising results and are under evaluation in Phase II/III clinical trials. Emerging therapies allow to select specific antiblastics that alone or by integrating the conventional therapeutic approach may overcome/hinder chemoresistance.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumour in adults. Despite the combination of novel therapeutical approaches, it remains a deadly malignancy with an abysmal prognosis. GBM is a polymorphic tumour from both molecular and histological points of view. It consists of different malignant cells and various stromal cells, contributing to tumour initiation, progression, and treatment response. GBM’s microenvironment is multifaceted and is made up of soluble factors, extracellular matrix components, tissue-resident cell types (e.g., neurons, astrocytes, endothelial cells, pericytes, and fibroblasts) together with resident (e.g., microglia) or recruited (e.g., bone marrow-derived macrophages) immune cells. These latter constitute the so-called immune microenvironment, accounting for a substantial GBM’s tumour volume. Despite the abundance of immune cells, an intense state of tumour immunosuppression is promoted and developed; this represents the significant challenge for cancer cells’ immune-mediated destruction. Though literature data suggest that distinct GBM’s subtypes harbour differences in their microenvironment, its role in treatment response remains obscure. However, an in-depth investigation of GBM’s microenvironment may lead to novel therapeutic opportunities to improve patients’ outcomes. This review will elucidate the GBM’s microenvironment composition, highlighting the current state of the art in immunotherapy approaches. We will focus on novel strategies of active and passive immunotherapies, including vaccination, gene therapy, checkpoint blockade, and adoptive T-cell therapies.

The processes of recurrence and metastasis, through which cancer relapses locally or spreads to distant sites in the body, accounts for more than 90% of cancer-related deaths. At present there are very few treatment options for patients at this stage of their disease. The main obstacle to successfully treat advanced cancer is the cells' ability to change in ways that make them resistant to treatment. Understanding the cellular mechanisms that mediate this cancer cell plasticity may lead to improved patient survival. Epigenetic reprogramming, together with tumor microenvironment, drives such dynamic mechanisms favoring tumor heterogeneity, and cancer cell plasticity. In addition, the development of new approaches that can report on cancer plasticity in their native environment have profound implications for studying cancer biology and monitoring tumor progression. We herein provide an overview of recent advancements in understanding the mechanisms regulating cell plasticity and current strategies for their monitoring and therapy management.

Introduction: The oncoplastic conservative surgery was developed as a natural evolution of traditional surgery, attempting to improve the therapeutic and aesthetic outcomes where tumor resection could be followed by not-adequate results. Our primary aim is to evaluate how patient satisfaction and quality-of-life after conservative oncoplastic surgery, using BREAST-Q (BCT Module), change pre- and post-operatively. The secondary aim is to compare patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic or traditional conservative surgery. Patients and methods: We enrolled 647 patients who underwent traditional conservative surgery or oncoplastic surgery from January 2020 to December 2022. Only 232 women (35.9%) completed the BREAST-Q questionnaire on a web-based platform, at the preoperative phase and 3 months after treatment. Results: The average score of “Psychosocial well-being” and “Satisfaction with Breasts” 3 months after surgery showed a statistically significant improvement, while the average score for “Physical well-being: Chest” at 3 months showed a worsening compared to the baseline. “Sexual well-being” did not show statistically significant change. A significant difference between the post-operative outcome of oncoplastic surgery and traditional surgery was observed only for Physical well-being (better for traditional surgery). Conclusions: The study showed significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes 3 months after the surgery, except for physical discomfort that increases especially after oncoplastic surgery. Furthermore, our data, as well as many others, point to the appropriateness of using OCS where there is an effective indication, while the perspective of patients cannot find significant superiority over TCS in any of the areas analyzed.

Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death among women worldwide. It represents a heterogeneous group of diseases with distinct morphological, immunophenotypic, and molecular profiles, which significantly impact clinical behavior and therapeutic response. Moreover, under treatment pressure, tumor cells may undergo molecular changes and phenotypic plasticity, leading to resistance and therapeutic failure. Although tissue biopsy remains the gold standard for diagnosis and molecular characterization, it has several limitations, including invasiveness, sampling bias, and the inability to dynamically capture tumor evolution over time. Hence, a non-invasive and repeatable approach capable of real-time monitoring is increasingly needed.