Maldynia: pathophysiology and management of neuropathic and maladaptive pain--a report of the AMA Council on Science and Public Health.

BACKGROUND: Because of disparate taxonomic arrays for classification, the American Academy of Pain Medicine has proposed categorizing pain on a neurobiologic basis as eudynia (nociceptive pain), Greek for "good pain," or maldynia (maladaptive pain), Greek for "bad pain." The latter has been viewed as maladaptive because it may occur in the absence of ongoing noxious stimuli and does not promote healing and repair. OBJECTIVE: To address recent findings on the pathogenesis of pain following neural injury and consider whether the development of maladaptive pain justifies its classification as a disease and to briefly discuss the scope of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches employed in patients with such pain. METHODS: English language reports on studies using human subjects were selected from a PubMed search of the literature from 1995 to August 2010 and from the Cochrane Library. Further information was obtained from Internet sites of medical specialty and other societies devoted to pain management. RESULTS: Neural damage to either the peripheral or central nervous system provokes multiple processes including peripheral and central sensitization, ectopic activity, neuronal cell death, disinhibition, altered gene expression, and abnormal sprouting and cellular connectivity. A series of neuro-immune interactions underlie many of these mechanisms. Imaging studies have shown that such damage is characterized by functional, structural, and chemical changes in the brain. Such pain is maladaptive in the sense that it occurs in the absence of ongoing noxious stimuli and does not promote healing and repair. CONCLUSION: As defined, maldynia is a multidimensional process that may warrant consideration as a chronic disease not only affecting sensory and emotional processing but also producing an altered brain state based on both functional imaging and macroscopic measurements. However, the absolute clinical value of this definition is not established.

Male breast cancer: risk factors, diagnosis, and management (Review).

Male breast cancer (MBC) is extremely rare, with an incidence in the general US population of <1%. It tends to be diagnosed at later stages than breast cancer in females, likely because of low awareness on the part of the patient and low suspicion by the physician. Risk factors include genetic predisposition, alterations to the estrogen-testosterone ratio, radiation exposure, and occupational hazards. Because of the rarity of MBC, mammography in men is more often utilized as a diagnostic tool to evaluate breast symptoms rather than as a tool for widespread screening. While clinical breast examinations are effective at evaluating breast symptoms, mammography also may be beneficial in separating malignant from benign breast disease. This study reviews MBC and its risk factors, recommendations for screening and diagnosis, the roles of mammography and genetic testing in surveillance, and management of patients with MBC. Heightened awareness of the increased risk in certain men by both physicians and patients, and adherence to guidelines recommended for the surveillance of men at increased risk, may result in earlier detection.

The effects of high fructose syrup.

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has become an increasingly common food ingredient in the last 40 years. However, there is concern that HFCS consumption increases the risk for obesity and other adverse health outcomes compared to other caloric sweeteners. The most commonly used types of HFCS (HFCS-42 and HFCS-55) are similar in composition to sucrose (table sugar), consisting of roughly equal amounts of fructose and glucose. The primary difference is that these monosaccharides exist free in solution in HFCS, but in disaccharide form in sucrose. The disaccharide sucrose is easily cleaved in the small intestine, so free fructose and glucose are absorbed from both sucrose and HFCS. The advantage to food manufacturers is that the free monosaccharides in HFCS provide better flavor enhancement, stability, freshness, texture, color, pourability, and consistency in foods in comparison to sucrose. Because the composition of HFCS and sucrose is so similar, particularly on absorption by the body, it appears unlikely that HFCS contributes more to obesity or other conditions than sucrose does. Nevertheless, few studies have evaluated the potentially differential effect of various sweeteners, particularly as they relate to health conditions such as obesity, which develop over relatively long periods of time. Improved nutrient databases are needed to analyze food consumption in epidemiologic studies, as are more strongly designed experimental studies, including those on the mechanism of action and relationship between fructose dose and response. At the present time, there is insufficient evidence to ban or otherwise restrict use of HFCS or other fructose-containing sweeteners in the food supply or to require the use of warning labels on products containing HFCS. Nevertheless, dietary advice to limit consumption of all added caloric sweeteners, including HFCS, is warranted.