Objective: To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA). Materials and Methods: From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups. Results: In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000). Conclusion RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.

Objective: To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA). Materials and Methods: From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups. Results: In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000). Conclusion RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Zinc finger protein 639 (ZNF639) is often found within the overlapping amplicon of PIK3CA, and previous studies suggest its involvement in the pathogenesis of esophageal and oral squamous cell carcinomas. However, its expression and significance in breast cancer remain uncharacterized. Methods: Immunohistochemical analysis of ZNF639 was performed using tissue microarrays.Functional studies, including colony formation, Transwell cell migration, and in vivo metastasis, were conducted on breast tumor cells with ZNF639 knockdown via small interfering RNA transfection. Results: Reduced ZNF639 immunoreactivity was observed in 82% of the breast cancer samples, independent of hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. In multivariate Cox regression analyses, ZNF639 expression was associated with favorable survival outcomes, including recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14–0.89) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16– 1.05). ZNF639 knockdown increased clonogenicity, cell motility, and lung metastasis in NOD/ SCID mice. Following the ZNF639 knockdown, the expression of Snail1, vimentin, and C-C chemokine ligand 20 (CCL20) was upregulated, and the changes in cell phenotype mediated by ZNF639 were reversed by the subsequent knockdown of CCL20. Conclusion Low ZNF639 expression is a novel prognostic factor for recurrence-free survival in patients with breast cancer.

Objective: Patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis are assessed for coronary artery disease (CAD) prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with treatment implications. Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the recommended modality but is associated with peri-procedural complications. Integrating machine learning (ML)-based computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) into existing TAVI-planning CT protocol may aid exclusion of significant CAD and thus avoiding ICA in selected patients. Materials and Methods: A single-center, retrospective study was conducted, 41 TAVI candidates with both TAVI-planning CT and ICA performed were analyzed. CT datasets were evaluated by a ML-based CT-FFR software. Beta-blocker and nitroglycerin were not administered in these patients. The primary outcome was to identify significant CAD. The diagnostic performance of CT-FFR was compared against ICA. Results: On per-patient level, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy were 89%, 94%, 80%, 97% and 93%, respectively. On per-vessel level, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy were 75%, 94%, 67%, 96% and 92%, respectively. The area under the receiver operative characteristics curve per individual coronary vessels yielded overall 0.90 (95% confidence interval 85%–95%). ICA may be avoided in up to 80% of patients if CT-FFR results were negative. Conclusion ML-based CT-FFR can provide accurate screening capabilities for significant CAD thus avoiding ICA. Its integration to existing TAVI-planning CT is feasible with the potential of improving the safety and efficiency of pre-TAVI CAD assessment.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Objective: To retrospectively compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with parotidectomy for superficial pleomorphic adenoma (PA). Materials and Methods: From March 2022 to October 2023, 88 patients diagnosed with superficial parotid PA underwent either RFA (n = 12; mean age, 47.1 years) or parotidectomy (n = 76; mean age, 47.8 years). Patients in the RFA group were matched to those in the surgery group in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores based on age, sex, tumor volume, diameter, location, and comorbidities. Ultrasound characteristics, cosmetic scores (0–4), numerical rating scale scores (0–10), and complications were assessed before the procedures and at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. Outcomes were compared between baseline and follow-up in the RFA group and between the RFA and surgery groups. Results: In the RFA group, significant reductions in tumor volume were observed between baseline (median, 2.02 cm 3 ) and the 1-month follow-up (median, 1.21 cm 3 ; P = 0.015), between the 1-month and 3-month follow-ups (median, 0.53 cm 3 ; P= 0.002), and between the 3- and 6-month follow-ups (median, 0.23 cm 3 ; P = 0.003). The volume reduction ratios at 1, 3, and 6 months were 39.7%, 79.9%, and 88.0%, respectively. The cosmetic score was significantly lower at 3- and 6-month followup compared to baseline (median 1 and 1 vs. 4, P = 0.04). The numerical rating scale scores did not differ significantly from baseline throughout follow-up. In the propensity score-matched analysis (12 patients per group), RFA was associated with a shorter median procedure time (61.5 vs. 253.3 minutes; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (0 vs. 4 days; P < 0.001), and lower cost (1859.9 vs. 3512.4 USD; P < 0.001) than parotidectomy, with no significant difference in overall complication rates (33.3% [4/12] vs. 41.7% [5/12]; P = 1.000). Conclusion RFA may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery for superficial parotid PA, offering a shorter median procedure time, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs.

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this guideline is to establish evidence-based recommendations for the clinical use of parenteral nutrition (PN) in adult patients within the acute hospital setting in Singapore. METHOD: An expert workgroup, consisting of healthcare practitioners actively involved in clinical nutrition support across all public health institutions, systematically evaluated existing evidence and addressed clinical questions relating to PN therapy. RESULTS: This clinical practice guideline developed 30 recommendations for PN therapy, which cover these key aspects related to PN use: indications, patient assess-ment, titration and formulation of PN bags, access routes and devices, and monitoring and management of PN-related complications. CONCLUSION This guideline provides recommendations to ensure appropriate and safe clinical practice of PN therapy in adult patients within the acute hospital setting.
Humans ; Singapore ; Parenteral Nutrition/adverse effects* ; Adult