An interview with Sylvia Frazier-Bowers

interview An interview with Sylvia Frazier-Bowers » Associate professor, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. » Postdoc, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, USA. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.2.022-028.int Dr. Frazier-Bowers is an associate professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC-CH), in the Department of Orthodontics. She received a BA from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and a DDS from the University of Illinois, Chicago. After completing the NIH Dentist-Scientist Program at UNC-CH in Orthodontics (Certificate, 97’) and Genetics and Molecular Biology (PhD, 99’), she completed a post-doctoral fellowship at the University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston (UTHSC), in the Department of Orthodontics. Leadership positions include president of local NC-AADR (North Carolina (2005-2006); director of the AADR Craniofacial Biology group (CBG) 2004-2007; IADR/AADR councilor for NC-AADR (2007, 2008, 2012) and for the CBG (2012-2015); member of Southern Association of Orthodontists Scientific Affairs Committee (2005-2013) and the American Association of Orthodontists Council on Scientific Affairs (2014 – Present). Dr. Frazier-Bowers also serves various editorial boards including the Journal of Dental Research and the Scientific Advisory board for the Consortium on Orthodontic Advances in Science and Technology. Her current role as faculty at UNC-CH includes conducting human genetic studies to determine the etiology of inherited tooth disorders, mentoring students at all levels, teaching graduate and pre-doctoral level Growth and Development courses and treating patients in the UNC School of Dentistry faculty practice in Orthodontics. Dra. Frazier-Bowers é professora associada da University of North Carolina em Chapel Hill (UNC-CH), Departamento de Ortodontia. Recebeu o diploma de bacharel pela University of Illinois em Urbana-Champaign e graduou-se em Odontologia pela University of Illinois em Chicago. Após concluir seus estudos pelo NIH Dentist-Scientist Program (K16) na UNC-CH, em Ortodontia (1997) e Genética e Biologia Molecular (1999), ela finalizou seus estudos de pós-doutorado na University of Texas Health Science Center em Houston (UTHSC), no Departamento de Ortodontia. Ocupou várias posições de liderança, incluindo os cargos de presidente do North Carolina Chapter of the American Association of Dental Research (NC-AADR) entre 2005 e 2006; diretora do AADR Craniofacial Biology Group (CBG) de 2004 a 2007; conselheira do International Association for Dental Research/American Association for Dental Research (IADR/AADR) em 2007, 2008 e 2012, e do CBG de 2012 a 2015; membro do Southern Association of Orthodontists Scientific Affairs Committee de 2005 a 2013 e da American Association of Orthodontists Council on Scientific Affairs desde 2014. Dr. Frazier-Bowers também é membro do corpo editorial de vários periódicos, incluindo o Journal of Dental Research, e do conselho científico do Consortium on Orthodontic Advances in Science and Technology. Sua atual função como membro do corpo docente da UNC-CH inclui realizar estudos sobre a genética humana para determinar a etiologia de anomalias dentárias hereditárias, orientar alunos de todos os níveis, lecionar em programas de graduação e pré-doutorado em cursos sobre Crescimento e Desenvolvimento, e tratar pacientes na clínica de Ortodontia da Faculdade de Odontologia da UNC. How to cite this section: Frazier-Bowers S. An interview with Sylvia Frazier-Bowers. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015 Mar-Apr;20(2):22-8. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.2.022-028.int Submitted: January 12, 2015 - Revised and accepted: January 19, 2015 © 2015 Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 22 Dental Press J Orthod. 2015 Mar-Apr;20(2):22-8 interview Frazier-Bowers S and mandibular prognathism. The simple classification of these types correlates with treatment regime, that is, either you surgically move the maxilla forward (or modify growth of the maxilla) or surgically set the mandible back. The combination of these two surgical movements is also a possibility. The nuance, however, exists in the many permutations of the dentofacial relationships that can lead to a specific treatment regime. This begs the question as to whether to attempt treatment with growth modification (i.e., when and how to treat). This is due in part to a more general problem in Clinical Orthodontics; specifically that much of the diagnostic process that based on cephalometric analysis is quite controversial. To address some of these challenges in understanding, one attractive proposal would be to develop a system whereby an objective and detailed characterization of malocclusion into specific subtypes (beyond Angle’s classification) could be correlated with specific haplotypes. Using Class III malocclusion as a model for this exercise, the range of the Class III phenotype should be carefully characterized first delineating, for example, between individuals with a Class III relationship, as measured by some antero-posterior (AP) determinants, such as ANB and overjet, versus those with a vertical component, such as downward and backward rotation of the mandible masking the AP problem. The ultimate accomplishment would be to determine the growth potential of each of these subtypes. Class III is one of the most challenging malocclusions to manage. Specifically, the development of an optimal diagnosis and treatment plan is difficult. Early orthopedic interventions have been advocated for skeletal Class III patients. However, many patients that are treated successfully at an early age experience relapse during subsequent growth. The prognosis of such patients can be greatly enhanced if accurate predictors of growth pattern and ultimate growth potential are identified and clinically applied. Moreover, a complete characterization of skeletal Class III individuals and future correlation with specific genetic factors holds great promise for the orthodontic specialty. In your opinion, is it clear that there are distinct types of Class III? And how this classification may help solve these cases? (Gustavo Zanardi) A simple answer to this question is that most orthodontists are aware that there are many subtypes of Class III malocclusion, but the agreement on what these subtypes are and how we can diagnose them is less clear. Several studies have explored the existence of different types of Class III versus a simplistic view of the malocclusion as originally defined by Angle. In our study2 we found five main subtypes that were highly relevant based on a cluster analysis of a large cohort followed by principal components analysis (Fig 1). Of the many subtypes that have been described, the two main types are maxillary deficiency Cluster analysis for Class III patients Five clusters cluster 1 cluster 2 cluster 3 cluster 4 cluster 5 » Mandibular prognathic (mp) » Long face » (...truncated)