Nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome (NBCCS) is a hereditary condition transmitted as an autosomal dominant trait with complete penetrance and variable expressivity. The syndrome is characterised by numerous basal cell carcinomas (BCCs), odontogenic keratocysts of the jaws, palmar and/or plantar pits, skeletal abnormalities and intracranial calcifications. In this paper, the clinical features of 37 Italian patients are reviewed. Jaw cysts and calcification of falx cerebri were the most frequently observed anomalies, followed by BCCs and palmar/plantar pits. Similar to the case of African Americans, the relatively low frequency of BCCs in the Italian population is probably due to protective skin pigmentation. A future search based on mutation screening might establish a possible genotype phenotype correlation in Italian patients.

No abstract

A series of 110 cases of oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) together with six lymph node and one distant metastatic lesions was analysed for expression of survivin, a recent apoptosis inhibitor, by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting. In total, 91 cases (82.7%) of carcinoma and all metastasis (seven cases, 100%) were positive for survivin expression, with weighted survivin scores ranging from 1 to 4. In contrast, normal oral epithelium did not express survivin. There was no significant correlation between survivin expression and age, sex, tumour size, the presence of lymph node and distant metastases. Survivin expression was increased in poorly differentiated tumours, even if differences were not statistically significant. In contrast, when analysed for prognostic significance, patients with low survivin expression had statistically significant better survival rates than the group with high survivin expression (Po0.05). These data suggest that survivin expression may identify cases of oral SCC with more aggressive and invasive phenotype.

Treatment with a combination of PRP and DFDBA led to a significantly greater clinical improvement in intrabony periodontal defects compared to DFDBA with saline. No statistically significant differences were observed in the hard tissue response between the two treatment groups, which confirmed that PRP had no effect on hard tissue fill or gain in new hard tissue formation.