Sapienza University of Rome

The study, conducted in collaboration with the Department of Biomedicine and Prevention at the University of Rome Tor Vergata and Tor Vergata University Hospital, underscores the relevance of polygenic risk scores (PRS) in risk stratification for patients with a genetic predisposition to breast cancer. MADRID, Oct. 3, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Veritas Genetics, in collaboration with the Department of Biomedicine and Prevention at the University of Rome Tor Vergata and the Tor Vergata University Hospital, has published the results of an innovative pilot study demonstrating the importance of polygenic risk scores (PRS) in identifying and managing women with a high risk of developing breast cancer. This groundbreaking study, led by Professor Giuseppe Novelli from the University of Tor Vergata in collaboration with key members of Veritas' medical-scientific team (Dr. Vincenzo Cirigliano, Dr. Luis Izquierdo, Giuliana Longo, and Bibiana Palao), suggests that PRS, combined with the assessment of known pathogenic variants, can provide a more accurate risk evaluation for both carriers and non-carriers of mutations in genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and ATM. Key Findings of the Study The study, published in the Journal of Personalized Medicine, evaluated women with a family history of breast cancer, demonstrating that PRS significantly improves the accuracy of individual risk prediction. This is particularly relevant for women who are non-carriers of pathogenic variants in susceptibility genes. For carriers of mutations in genes like BRCA1 and BRCA2, PRS offers a complementary approach that helps refine personalized management and prevention strategies. According to Dr. Izquierdo, Chief Medical Officer at Veritas, "This study reaffirms the clinical value of genomic tools in personalizing preventive medicine. The use of PRS, along with traditional genetic evaluation, allows healthcare professionals to offer more precise and tailored care to the individual needs of each patient, ultimately improving long-term outcomes." An Essential Tool for Personalized Medicine PRS has the potential to transform how cancer risk is assessed and managed in patients with a family history of the disease. Dr. Izquierdo, added: "Polygenic risk scoring not only provides a deeper evaluation of genetic risk but also redefines how we understand cancer susceptibility in families with a history of the disease. This tool is key to the future of personalized medicine and the proactive management of complex conditions like breast cancer." About Veritas Genetics Veritas Genetic leads the implementation of advanced genomic solutions, focusing on preventive and personalized medicine. Through partnerships with top-tier academic institutions, Veritas continues to drive innovation aimed at improving health and well-being. WANT YOUR COMPANY'S NEWS FEATURED ON PRNEWSWIRE.COM? 440k+ Newsrooms & Influencers 9k+ Digital Media Outlets 270k+ Journalists Opted In GET STARTED

CHICAGO, June 10, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- The 2024 edition of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Congress highlighted a concerning rise in cancer cases in Western countries. In the United States, cancer diagnoses have exceeded 2 million. This exponential growth, common to all Western countries, requires prevention focused on the investigation and monitoring of the physiopathological conditions that drive cancer, rather than early diagnosis, which saves many lives from cancer but doesn't prevent the disease. Continue Reading from ASCO "The ASCO 2024 Congress delivered a clear message: to combat the cancer epidemic, it is essential to invest in active prevention strategies and correct unhealthy lifestyles. Research and innovation, such as the HELIXAFE protocol, are crucial tools to reduce the disease burden and improve public health." Saverio Cinieri, President of the AIOM Foundation (Italian Association of Medical Oncology), raised: "High costs of cancer risk make healthcare systems unsustainable. As AIOM Foundation, we prioritize promoting healthy lifestyles and emphasizing Cancer Driver Interception, as the new frontier of active prevention." Cancer Driver Interception: The New Frontier of Prevention Developed by a spin-off of the University of Rome Tor Vergata, the HELIXAFE protocol, using the Cancer Driver Inteception methodology, represents an active prevention strategy against conditions that can lead to cancer development. Professor Adriana Albini, Head of the Cancer Prevention Working Group at AACR (American Association for Cancer Research), and Board Member of Bioscience Foundation, explained: "Carcinogenesis takes years. Initially, there are predisposing molecular conditions that, if intercepted and modified, can halt the process preventing the onset of the cancer. These conditions are now clearly studied and can be monitored with HELIXAFE protocol tests." Dr. Giuseppe Mucci, President of Bioscience Foundation, outlined the main indicators of the prodromal conditions of cancer development that anticipate the early detection. "Genomic instability is the driver condition from which cancer originates and corresponds to the progressive accumulation of damages in the DNA that are not repaired by onco-suppressor genes. The macroenvironment, which promotes and accelerates the transformation from genomic instability to cancer, is assessable by the analysis of inflammatory signals that induce systemic inflammation, by the parameters that indicate the efficiency of the immune system and the balance of the intestinal bacterial flora." Conclusions The ASCO 2024 Congress delivered a clear message: to combat the cancer epidemic, it is essential to invest in active prevention strategies and correct unhealthy lifestyles. Research and innovation, such as the HELIXAFE protocol, are crucial tools to reduce the disease burden and improve public health. BIOSCIENCE FOUNDATION Dedicated to understanding the root causes of cancer and advocating for preventive strategies since 2005. Born from a collaboration with University of Rome Tor Vergata and located at San Raffaele Hospital, Milan. As an NGO whose mission is to shift the cancer prevention paradigm from early detection to Cancer Driver Interception, we aim to introduce methodologies and services globally to identify physiological conditions driving solid tumor development in symptom-free individuals. Leveraging our AI-based monitoring program, HELIXAFE, we screen for cancer driver conditions with high accuracy and sensitivity. We believe it will become a scientific preventive tool for all solid cancers, complementing healthy lifestyle recommendations. Photo - Logo - SOURCE Bioscience Foundation

Some say the next step in human evolution will be the integration of technology with flesh. Now, researchers have used virtual reality to test whether humans can feel embodiment -- the sense that something is part of one's body -- toward prosthetic 'hands' that resemble a pair of tweezers. They report that participants felt an equal degree of embodiment for the tweezer-hands and were also faster and more accurate in completing motor tasks in virtual reality than when they were equipped with a virtual human hand. Some say the next step in human evolution will be the integration of technology with flesh. Now, researchers have used virtual reality to test whether humans can feel embodiment -- the sense that something is part of one's body -- toward prosthetic "hands" that resemble a pair of tweezers. They report June 6 in the journal iScience that participants felt an equal degree of embodiment for the tweezer-hands and were also faster and more accurate in completing motor tasks in virtual reality than when they were equipped with a virtual human hand. "For our biology to merge seamlessly with tools, we need to feel that the tools are part of our body," says first author and cognitive neuroscientist Ottavia Maddaluno, who conducted the work at the Sapienza University of Rome and the Santa Lucia Foundation IRCCS with Viviana Betti. "Our findings demonstrate that humans can experience a grafted tool as an integral part of their own body." Previous studies have shown that tool use induces plastic changes in the human brain, as does the use of anthropomorphic prosthetic limbs. However, an open scientific question is whether humans can embody bionic tools or prostheses that don't resemble human anatomy. To investigate this possibility, the researchers used virtual reality to conduct a series of experiments on healthy participants. In the virtual reality environment, participants had either a human-like hand or "bionic tool" resembling a large pair of tweezers grafted onto the end of their wrist. To test their motor ability and dexterity, participants were asked to pop bubbles of a specific color (by pinching them with their tweezers or between their index finger and thumb). For this simple task, the researchers found that participants were faster and more accurate at popping virtual bubbles when they had tweezer-hands. Next, the team used a test called the "cross-modal congruency task" to compare implicit or unconscious embodiment for the virtual hand and bionic tool. During this test, the researchers applied small vibrations to the participants' fingertips and asked them to identify which fingers were stimulated. At the same time, a flickering light was displayed on the virtual reality screen, either on the same finger as the tactile stimulus or on a different finger. By comparing the participants' accuracy and reaction times during trials with matched and mismatched stimuli, the researchers were able to assess how distracted they were by the visual stimulus. "This is an index of how much of a mismatch there is in your brain between what you feel and what you see," says Maddaluno. "But this mismatch could only happen if your brain thinks that what you see is part of your own body; if I don't feel that the bionic tool that I'm seeing through virtual reality is part of my own body, the visual stimulus should not give any interference." In both cases, participants were faster and more accurate at identifying which of their real fingers were stimulated during trials with matched tactile and visual stimuli, indicating that participants felt a sense of embodiment toward both the virtual human hand and the tweezer-hands. However, there was a bigger difference between matched and mismatched trials when participants had tweezer- rather than human hands, indicating that the non-anthropomorphic prosthesis resulted in an even greater sense of embodiment. The researchers speculate that this is due to the tweezer-hands' relative simplicity compared to a human-like hand, which might make it easy for the brain to compute and accept. "In terms of the pinching task, the tweezers are functionally similar to a human hand, but simpler, and simple is also better computationally for the brain." says Maddaluno. They note that it could also relate to the "uncanny valley" hypothesis, since the virtual human hands might have been too eerily similar yet distinct for perfect embodiment. In addition to the tweezer-hands, the researchers also tested a wrench-shaped bionic tool and a virtual human hand holding a pair of tweezers. They found evidence of embodiment in all cases, but the participants had higher embodiment and were more dexterous when the tweezers were grafted directly onto their virtual wrists than when they held them in their virtual hand. Participants also displayed a higher sense of embodiment for the bionic tools when they had the opportunity to explore the virtual reality environment before undertaking the cross-modal congruency test. "During the cross-modal congruency task participants had to stay still, whereas during the motor task, they actively interacted with the virtual environment, and these interactions in the virtual environment induce a sense of agency," says Maddaluno. Ultimately, the researchers say that this study could inform robotics and prosthetic limb design. "The next step is to study if these bionic tools could be embodied in patients that have lost limbs," says Maddaluno. "And we also want to investigate the plastic changes that this kind of bionic tool can induce in the brains of both healthy participants and amputees."