Immunotherapy emerged as a new treatment modality for breast cancer, and its use is approved in combination with chemotherapy for first-line therapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer overexpressing PD-L1. As immune checkpoint inhibitors alone have modest clinical activity in advanced breast cancer, there is a growing interest in combinatorial modalities, and particularly for their rapid development in the early disease setting. The plethora of ongoing immunotherapy trials in early breast cancer comes at a time when solid data in advanced disease are still imperfect. This review offers a perspective on the efforts to establish the efficacy and safety of immunotherapeutic agents in early breast cancer.With new therapeutic protocols, more patients treated for glioblastoma have experienced a suspicious radiologic image of progression (pseudoprogression) during follow-up. Pseudoprogression should be differentiated from true progression because the disease management is completely different. In the case of pseudoprogression, the follow-up continues, and the patient is considered stable. In the case of true progression, a treatment adjustment is necessary. Presently, a pseudoprogression diagnosis certainly needs to be pathologically confirmed. Some important efforts in the radiological, histopathological, and genomic fields have been made to differentiate pseudoprogression from true progression, and the assessment of response criteria exists but remains limited. The aim of this paper is to highlight clinical and pathological markers to differentiate pseudoprogression from true progression through a literature review.The myoepithelial cell seems to play an important role as a tumor suppressor in the development of carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma. Nevertheless, interesting aspects concerning the other side of the coin, i.e., the contribution of the myoepithelial cell to cell proliferation, were brought to light. Here we highlighted the studies in which myoepithelial cells were presented as tumor suppressors and promoters in the context of PA malignant transformation. In conclusion, even if in a paracrine way, divergent signals can alter the suppressor role of the myoepithelial cell and induce it to compose a microenvironment propitious to the tumor progression of the malignant cells. This would cause myoepithelial cells to succumb and malignant epithelial cells to initiate progression beyond the basal membrane.The objective of this review is to elucidate the role of miRNAs in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). To achieve our goal, we searched databases such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, Springer, Web of Science and Scopus. We retrieved up to 1233 articles, based a rigorous selection criterion, only 197 articles were extensively reviewed. We selected articles only addressing TNBC, but not other types of breast cancer, with the employed approach being miRNA analysis and/or profiling. Our extensive review resulted in grouping of miRNAs into categories in which specific members of miRNAs have roles in specific mechanism in TNBC i.e., carcinogenesis, invasion, metastasis, apoptosis, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. TNBC is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer; therefore, different approaches for accurate diagnosis, prognosis and treatment are needed. In this review we summarize the up-to-date miRNA profiling, prognostic, and therapeutic findings that add to the route of controlling TNBC. To investigate and compare the clinical and imaging features among family members infected with COVID-19. We retrospectively collected a total of 34 COVID-19 cases (15 male, 19 female, aged 48±16 years, ranging from 10 to 81 years) from 13 families from January 17, 2020 through February 15, 2020. Patients were divided into two groups Group 1 - part of the family members (first-generation) who had exposure history and others (second-generation) infected through them, and Group 2 - patients from the same family having identical exposure history. We collected clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) features for each patient. Comparison tests were performed between the first- and second-generation patients in Group 1. In total there were 21 patients in Group 1 and 20 patients in Group 2. For Group 1, first-generation patients had significantly higher white blood cell count (6.5×10 /L (interquartile range (IQR) 4.9-9.2×10 /L) vs 4.5×10 /L (IQR 3.7-5.3×10 /L); P=0.0265), higher neutrophil count (4.9×10 /L (IQR 3.6-7.3×10 /L) vs 2.9×10 /L (IQR 2.1-3.3×10 /L); P=0.0111), and higher severity scores on HRCT (3.9±2.4 vs 2.0±1.3, P=0.0362) than the second-generation patients. Associated underlying diseases (odds ratio, 8.0, 95% confidence interval 3.4-18.7, P=0.0013) were significantly correlated with radiologic severity scores in second-generation patients. Analysis of the family cluster cases suggests that COVID-19 had no age or sex predominance. Secondarily infected patients in a family tended to develop milder illness, but this was not true for those with existing comorbidities.Analysis of the family cluster cases suggests that COVID-19 had no age or sex predominance. Secondarily infected patients in a family tended to develop milder illness, but this was not true for those with existing comorbidities. Identification of patients who can benefit from immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy is key for improved clinical outcome. Recently, U.S. BRD7389 Food and Drug Administration approved tumor mutational burden (TMB) high (TMB-H or TMB ≥ 10) as a biomarker for pembrolizumab treatment of solid tumors. We intend to test the hypothesis that mutations in select genes may be a better predictor of NSCLC response to ICB therapy than TMB-H. We compiled a list of candidate genes that may predict for benefits from ICB treatment by use of data from a recently published cohort of 350 patients with NSCLC. We then evaluated the influences of different mutation signatures in the candidate genes on ICB efficacy. They were also compared with TMB-H. The predictive powers of different mutation signatures were then evaluated in an independent cohort of patients with NSCLC treated with ICB. A compound mutation signature, in which two or more of the 52 candidate genes were mutated, accounted for 145 of 350 patients with NSCLC and was associated with considerable ICB treatment benefits.