Search

Simple Summary: This paper delves into the persistent issue of unequal access to medical imaging, with a particular focus on breast cancer screening and its impact on marginalized communities and racial/ethnic minorities. Central to our discussion is the role of scientific mobility among radiologists in fostering healthcare policy changes that promote diversity and cultural competence. We propose various strategies to bridge this gap, including cultural education, sensitivity training, and diversifying the radiology workforce. These measures aim to improve communication with diverse patient groups and reduce healthcare disparities. Additionally, we explore the challenges and advantages of teleradiology as a means to extend medical imaging services to underserved areas. In the context of artificial intelligence, we emphasize the critical need to validate algorithms across diverse populations to ensure unbiased and equitable healthcare outcomes. Overall, this paper underscores the importance of international collaboration in addressing global access barriers, presenting it as a key to mitigating disparities in medical imaging access and contributing to the pursuit of equitable healthcare. Access to medical imaging is pivotal in healthcare, playing a crucial role in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of diseases. However, disparities persist in this scenario, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals facing linguistic or cultural barriers. This paper critically assesses methods to mitigate these disparities, with a focus on breast cancer screening. We underscore scientific mobility as a vital tool for radiologists to advocate for healthcare policy changes: it not only enhances diversity and cultural competence within the radiology community but also fosters international cooperation and knowledge exchange among healthcare institutions. Efforts to ensure cultural competency among radiologists are discussed, including ongoing cultural education, sensitivity training, and workforce diversification. These initiatives are key to improving patient communication and reducing healthcare disparities. This paper also highlights the crucial role of policy changes and legislation in promoting equal access to essential screening services like mammography. We explore the challenges and potential of teleradiology in improving access to medical imaging in remote and underserved areas. In the era of artificial intelligence, this paper emphasizes the necessity of validating its models across a spectrum of populations to prevent bias and achieve equitable healthcare outcomes. Finally, the importance of international collaboration is illustrated, showcasing its role in sharing insights and strategies to overcome global access barriers in medical imaging. Overall, this paper offers a comprehensive overview of the challenges related to disparities in medical imaging access and proposes actionable strategies to address these challenges, aiming for equitable healthcare delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This review provides a comprehensive overview of mammary Paget disease (MPD) from its historical origins to the current diagnostic and treatment strategies while also exploring promising avenues for future advancements in the field. With improved understanding and ongoing research efforts, we aim to enhance the prognosis and quality of life for individuals affected by this relatively uncommon condition. Mammary Paget disease (MPD) is a rare condition primarily affecting adult women, characterized by unilateral skin changes in the nipple–areolar complex (NAC) and frequently associated with underlying breast carcinoma. Histologically, MPD is identified by large intraepidermal epithelial cells (Paget cells) with distinct characteristics. Immunohistochemical profiles aid in distinguishing MPD from other skin conditions. Clinical evaluation and imaging techniques, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are recommended if MPD is suspected, although definitive diagnosis always requires histological examination. This review delves into the historical context, epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis of MPD, emphasizing the need for early detection. The classification of MPD based on pathogenesis is explored, shedding light on its varied presentations. Treatment options, including mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery, are discussed with clear guidelines for different scenarios. Adjuvant therapies are considered, particularly in cases with underlying breast cancer. Prognostic factors are outlined, underlining the importance of early intervention. Looking to the future, emerging techniques, like liquid biopsy, new immunohistochemical and molecular markers, and artificial intelligence-based image analysis, hold the potential to transform MPD diagnosis and treatment. These innovations offer hope for early detection and improved patient care, though validation through large-scale clinical trials is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Screening mammography reduces mortality from breast malignancy. However, breast cancer screening is, unfortunately, hindered due to the poor sensitivity of mammography in dense breasts: up to 15–30% of all cancers may be missed. Given the rapid development of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) and its potential for diagnostic use, even in an asymptomatic population, it seems very important to correctly assess the Average Glandular Dose (AGD) for a single CEM examination. Few studies have compared the AGD of CEM versus Digital Mammography (DM) and protocols, including Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) plus DM, in the same group of patients. The additional role of tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in asymptomatic patients with dense breasts in screening examinations has been well investigated with encouraging results. In this study, we intend to compare the AGD and the diagnostic performance of CEM versus DM, and of CEM versus DM + DBT, performed in the same group of patients over the same period of time in a screening setting. This study aims to evaluate the Average Glandular Dose (AGD) and diagnostic performance of CEM versus Digital Mammography (DM) as well as versus DM plus one-view Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), which were performed in the same patients at short intervals of time. A preventive screening examination in high-risk asymptomatic patients between 2020 and 2022 was performed with two-view Digital Mammography (DM) projections (Cranio Caudal and Medio Lateral) plus one Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) projection (mediolateral oblique, MLO) in a single session examination. For all patients in whom we found a suspicious lesion by using DM + DBT, we performed (within two weeks) a CEM examination. AGD and compression force were compared between the diagnostic methods. All lesions identified by DM + DBT were biopsied; then, we assessed whether lesions found by DBT were also highlighted by DM alone and/or by CEM. We enrolled 49 patients with 49 lesions in the study. The median AGD was lower for DM alone than for CEM (3.41 mGy vs. 4.24 mGy, p = 0.015). The AGD for CEM was significantly lower than for the DM plus one single projection DBT protocol (4.24 mGy vs. 5.55 mGy, p < 0.001). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the median compression force between the CEM and DM + DBT. DM + DBT allows the identification of one more invasive neoplasm one in situ lesion and two high-risk lesions, compared to DM alone. The CEM, compared to DM + DBT, failed to identify only one of the high-risk lesions. According to these results, CEM could be used in the screening of asymptomatic high-risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

E-cadherin (CDH1 gene) germline mutations are associated with the development of diffuse gastric cancer in the context of the so-called hereditary diffuse gastric syndrome, and with an inherited predisposition of lobular breast carcinoma. In 2019, the international gastric cancer linkage consortium revised the clinical criteria and established guidelines for the genetic screening of CDH1 germline syndromes. Nevertheless, the introduction of multigene panel testing in clinical practice has led to an increased identification of E-cadherin mutations in individuals without a positive family history of gastric or breast cancers. This observation motivated us to review and present a novel multidisciplinary clinical approach (nutritional, surgical, and image screening) for single subjects who present germline CDH1 mutations but do not fulfil the classic clinical criteria, namely those identified as—(1) incidental finding and (2) individuals with lobular breast cancer without family history of gastric cancer (GC). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]