Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the most common microvascular complications of diabetes mellitus (DM) and a leading cause of blindness in working-age adults in developed countries. Numerous investigations have recognised inflammation and angiogenesis as important factors in the development of this complication of diabetes. Current methods of DR treatment are predominantly used at advanced stages of the disease and could be associated with serious side effects. Therefore, new diagnostic methods are needed in order to identify the initial stages of DR as well as monitoring the effects of applied therapy. Biochemical biomarkers are molecules found in blood or other biological fluid and tissue that indicate the existence of an abnormal condition or disease. They could be a valuable tool in detecting early stages of DR, identifying patients most susceptible to retinopathy progression and monitoring treatment outcomes. Biomarkers related to DR can be measured in the blood, retina, vitreous, aqueous humour and recently in tears. As the retina represents a small part of total body mass, a circulating biomarker for DR needs to be highly specific. Local biomarkers are more reliable as indicators of the retinal pathology; however, obtaining a sample of aqueous humour, vitreous or retina is an invasive procedure with potential serious complications. As a non-invasive novel method, tear analysis offers a promising direction in further research for DR biomarker detection. The aim of this paper is to review systemic and local inflammatory and angiogenic biomarkers relevant to this sight threatening diabetic complication.

SUMMARY Although breast cancer (BC) occurs more often in older women, it is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy in women of childbearing age. Owing to the overall advancement of modern medicine and the growing global trend of delaying childbirth until later age, we find ever more younger women diagnosed and treated for BC who have not yet completed their family. Therefore, fertility preservation has emerged as a very important quality of life issue for young BC survivors. This paper reviews currently available options for fertility preservation in young women with early-stage BC and highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to fertility preservation as a very important quality of life issue for young BC survivors. Pregnancy after BC treatment is considered not to be associated with an increased risk of BC recurrence; therefore, it should not be discouraged for those women who want to achieve pregnancy after oncologic treatment. Currently, it is recommended to delay pregnancy for at least 2 years after BC diagnosis, when the risk of recurrence is highest. However, BC patients of reproductive age should be informed about the potential negative effects of oncologic therapy on fertility, as well as on the fertility preservation options available, and if interested in fertility preservation, they should be promptly referred to a reproductive specialist. Early referral to a reproductive specialist is an important factor that increases the likelihood of successful fertility preservation. Embryo and mature oocyte cryopreservation are currently the only established fertility preservation methods but they require ovarian stimulation (OS), which delays initiation of chemotherapy for at least 2 weeks. Controlled OS does not seem to increase the risk of BC recurrence. Other fertility preservation methods (ovarian tissue cryopreservation, cryopreservation of immature oocytes and ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists) do not require OS but are still considered to be experimental techniques for fertility preservation.

The aim of this review article is to present current options for fertility preservation in young women with gynecological tumors (ovarian, endometrial or cervical cancer). An early pretreatment referral to multidisciplinary team which consists of general gynecologists, gynecologic oncologists, embryologists, radiologists, pathologists, and reproductive endocrinologists should be suggested to young women with gynecologic cancer, concerning the risks and benefits of fertility preservation options. Only a small percentage of patients with ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumors, are appropriate candidates for fertility preservation (FIGO stage IA and IC epithelial ovarian cancer). Following oophorectomy, ovarian tissue or oocytes are removed from the ovary for the use of cryopreservation; after completion of oncological treatment patient undergoes orthotopic retransplantation of ovarian tissue whereas oocytes may be used for in vitro fertilization. Live birth rates up to 53.8% have been reported after fertility preservation treatment in selected patients. In patients with endometrial cancer fertility preservation treatment means conserving of the uterus. Appropriate candidates for fertility preservation are younger women with well differentiated endometrial cancer, which does not invade the myometrium. Fertility preservation treatment in endometrial cancer is hormonal, based on progestins. After completion of fertility preservation treatment, frequent follow-ups are necessary, with tissue sampling (via curettage or endometrial biopsy) remaining standard approach in follow- up. Live birth rates after progestin therapy are around 60%, or even higher with the help of assisted reproductive procedures. In cervical cancer, fertility preservation treatment can be considered in women with early-stage disease (FIGO IA1, IA2, or IB1). Cone biopsy or conization followed by laparoscopic lymphadenectomy has been described as an appropriate procedure, with conception rates up to 47%.

No abstract