clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00404534.

Objective: Evaluate the impact of endoscopic partial inferior turbinectomy (EPIT) associated with primary rhinoseptoplasty on quality-of-life outcomes (QOL), complications, and surgical duration.Study Design: Randomized clinical trial. Methods: Individuals with nasal obstruction aged 16 years who were candidates for functional and aesthetics primary rhinoseptoplasty were evaluated from March 2014 through May 2015. Eligible participants were randomly allocated to rhinoseptoplasty with or without EPIT (excision of one-third of the inferior turbinates).Results: Fifty patients were studied. Most were Caucasian and had moderate/severe allergic rhinitis symptoms. Mean age was 36 ( 6 14.5) years. Rhinoseptoplasty was associated with improvement in all QOL scores irrespective of turbinate intervention (P < 0.001). Analysis of covariance was conducted to control for potential confounders. There was no difference between the groups in absolute score changes for Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation-Portuguese (NOSE-p) (250.5 vs. 247.6; P 5 0.723), Rhinoplasty Outcome Evaluation (ROE) (47 vs. 44.8; P 5 0.742), and all World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale-Abbreviated (WHOQOL-bref) score domains (P > 0.05). There were no differences between the groups regarding presence of the complications. Surgical duration was higher in the EPIT group (212 minutes 6 7.8 vs. 159.1 6 5.6; P ? 0.001).Conclusions: Turbinate reduction through EPIT during primary rhinoseptoplasty did not improve short-term general and specific QOL outcomes. The use of EPIT increases surgical time considerably without improving QOL scores. There was no difference in postoperative incidence of complications, suggesting that EPIT is a safe technique.

Introduction Inferior turbinate surgery is often performed concomitantly with rhinoseptoplasty. As inferior turbinates play a major role in allergic rhinitis, it seems reasonable to suggest that inferior turbinate surgery reduces allergy. Objective To assess the impact of nasal turbinate surgery on non-obstructive allergic symptoms (nasal discharge, sneezing, pruritus, and allergic conjunctivitis) and on the use of allergic medication in patients with allergic rhinitis undergoing rhinoseptoplasty. Methods Secondary analysis of aggregated data from two randomized controlled trials. Participants with allergic rhinitis aged ≥ 16 years were recruited. Data from two groups were analyzed: patients with rhinoseptoplasty and concomitant turbinate reduction (intervention group) and patients with rhinoseptoplasty only (control group). The 90-day postoperative frequency of non-obstructive allergic symptoms and of nasal steroid and oral antihistamine use were analyzed. Results A total of 100 patients were studied. The groups were similar in terms of allergic symptom intensity and mean age. The frequency of non-obstructive allergic symptoms decreased 90 days postoperative in both groups (p < 0.01). There was no difference between the groups in the frequency of non-obstructive allergic symptoms at 90 days (p = 0.835). Topical nasal steroid and oral histamine antagonist use decreased in the intervention group at 90 days (p < 0.05). Conclusions Ninety days after the surgery, turbinate reduction performed in association with rhinoseptoplasty did not reduce the frequency of non-obstructive allergic symptoms more than rhinoplasty alone. However, the observed decrease in nasal steroid and oral antihistamine use suggests an impact of turbinate reduction on medication use in patients with allergic rhinitis undergoing rhinoseptoplasty. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov database (NCT01457638 and NCT02231216).

The development of targeted therapies for non-BRAF p.Val600-mutant melanomas remains a challenge. Triple wildtype (TWT) melanomas that lack mutations in BRAF, NRAS, or NF1 form 10% of human melanomas and are heterogeneous in their genomic drivers. MAP2K1 mutations are enriched in BRAF-mutant melanoma and function as an innate or adaptive resistance mechanism to BRAF inhibition. Here we report the case of a patient with TWT melanoma with a bona fide MAP2K1 mutation without any BRAF mutations. We performed a structural analysis to validate that the MEK inhibitor trametinib could block this mutation. Although the patient initially responded to trametinib, he eventually progressed. The presence of a CDKN2A deletion prompted us to combine a CDK4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, with trametinib but without clinical benefit. Genomic analysis at progression showed multiple novel copy number alterations. Our case illustrates the challenges of combining MEK1 and CDK4/6 inhibitors in case of resistance to MEK inhibitor monotherapy.

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License OJOR.MS.ID.000525.