Search

Background/Aim: The effect of surgical intervention on the quality of life and survival of patients presenting with metastatic breast cancer is a controversial issue. In this study, we aimed to reveal the survival, clinical, and pathological differences in patients with breast cancer who had metastatic disease at diagnosis and who underwent and did not undergo surgery for the primary tumor in our clinic and to evaluate the efficacy of surgical approach on the course of the disease. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the data of patients with metastatic breast cancer in our clinics between January 2000 and June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The study included those with primary metastatic disease. The study did not include male patients, patients with primary non-breast tumors, those who died of causes unrelated to breast cancer, those who underwent surgery for metastatic foci other than the primary tumor, and those who could not be followed up regularly for various reasons. In our study, there were two groups; those who received only systemic therapy were assigned to Group 1, while those who underwent surgical treatment for the primary tumor were assigned to Group 2. The clinicopathological and survival data of the groups were examined. Results: Surgical intervention was performed on 62 of our patients. The 4-year survival rates were higher than those who did not undergo surgery (Group 1: 59.6 [14.7%], Group 2: 83.5 [6%]). The comparison of the two groups showed a longer median survival in patients in Group 2 who underwent surgery, albeit not statistically significant (77 [11.23] months in Group 1 and 84 [18.91] months in Group 2 [P=0.16]). Conclusion: In conclusion, our study showed that surgical treatment may have positive effects on survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: We compared the survival outcomes of surgery within multimodality treatment regimens with the outcomes of definitive chemoradiation treatments in patients diagnosed with clinical (c) IIIB/N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether surgery within multimodality treatment provides a survival advantage at this stage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from 79 patients with cIIIB/N2 between 2009 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. While the surgery was performed after neoadjuvant therapy in 51 cases (IIIB/Surgery Group), definitive chemotherapy ± radiotherapy was applied in 28 cases (IIIB/Definitive Group). RESULTS: In cIIIB/N2 cases, the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 27.4%, with a median OS of 24.6 months. The 5-year OS of the IIIB/ Surgery Group was 27.3% (median survival 22.5 months), while it was 28.6% (median survival 29.1 months) in the IIIB/Definitive Group (P = .387, HR = 0.798, 95% CI, 0.485-1.313). Although there was a survival advantage in the group with a pathological complete response (PCR) after surgery (n = 14) compared to the group that did not (n = 37), the observed difference was not statistically significant. (5-year OS; 42.9% vs. 18.5%, P = .104). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between the survival of PCR patients and the IIIB/Definitive Group in terms of OS (P = .488). CONCLUSION: Surgery performed within multimodality treatment regimens in selected cIIIB/N2 cases did not provide a survival advantage over definitive chemoradiation treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE This study's objective is to assess the effectiveness of treatment and the prognostic factors that affect survival in 28 patients with epithelial thymic tumors who had adjuvant or definitive radiotherapy (RT) at our facility. METHODS The study comprised 28 patients who received RT at the Radiation Oncology Department of Eskişehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Medicine between 2010 and 2021. Each patient received RT (3DCRT/IMRT/VMAT). RESULTS The median overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and progression-free survival (PFS) at a median follow-up of 74 months were 76 (3-201), 29, and 57 (0-198) months, respectively. The median RT dose was 50 Gy (44-66). While there was no statistically significant difference between DFS and RT doses (p=0.88), there was a statistically significant difference between PFS and OS and 50 Gy and higher doses (p=0.03 vs. p=0.02). CONCLUSION Post-operative RT has been proven to be beneficial in cases of incomplete resection, even if the role of adjuvant RT in patients with complete resection remains debatable. It is well established that primary unresectable thymic tumors can be treated safely and successfully with neoadjuvant or definitive chemoradiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In this study, the relationship between response to second-line nivolumab treatment in advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and systemic immune inflammation index (SII) was investigated. Methods: One hundred and twenty-nine patients with advanced NSCLC who received nivolumab in second line between July 2018 and July 2023 were included. The optimum cutoff value for neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), SII, platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and body mass index (BMI) was calculated. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed for all parameters for prognostic evaluation. Results: In univariate analysis, patients with low SII found longer PFS and OS (HR = 1.762 for PFS, 95% CI 1.053-2.949, p=0.031, for OS HR=1.433, 95% CI 1.011-2.031, p=0.043). However, in multivariate analysis, no significance was found between low SII and OS (HR=1.614 for OS, 95%CI 0.984-2.648, p=0.058). No statistically significant relationship was found between NLR, PLR, BMI and Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) with OS and PFS. OS was found to be longer in patients with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) of 1% and above and without liver metastasis (p=0.031 and p=0.040, respectively). Conclusion: Low SII before nivolumab treatment was associated with long PFS. A significant correlation was found between PD-L1 of 1% and above and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer is a significant health problem for refugees and host countries. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among refugees. The subject of our study is to examine the clinical and pathological features of Syrian refugees with breast cancer and compare them with Turkish patients with breast cancer. Methods: Data of patients with breast cancer between January 2018 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical and histological features, treatment modalities and overall survival were collected and analyzed. Results: A total number of 338 women with breast cancer were included in this study. Ninety-nine of the 338 (29.3%) patients were Syrian refugees and 239 patients (70.7%) were Turkish. The median follow-up time was significantly lower in Syrian patients (P < 0.001). Median OS was 146 months in Turkish and 116 months in Syrian group (P = 0.022). Independent risk factors associated with long survival were receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.465; 95% CI 0.234-0.926; P = 0.029), adjuvant radiotherapy (HR 0.372 95% CI 0.182-0.758; P = 0.007), and adjuvant hormonotherapy (HR 0.367; 95% CI 0.201-0.669; P = 0.001). The rates of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy, and adjuvant hormonal therapy were significantly lower in the Syrian group (P = 0.023, P = 0.005, P = 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: Syrian refugees with breast cancer are more likely to receive suboptimal treatments. They have inferior survival compared to local patients. Our findings highlight the need for the provision of cancer therapy in such vulnerable populations. We suggest that more attention should be paid to breast cancer, as it is the most common cancer among refugees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, 683 patients with endometrial cancer (EC) after comprehensive surgical staging were classified into four risk groups as low (LR), intermediate (IR), high-intermediate (HIR) and high-risk (HR), according to the recent consensus risk grouping. Patients with disease confined to the uterus, ≥50% myometrial invasion (MI) and/or grade 3 histology were treated with vaginal brachytherapy (VBT). Patients with stage II disease, positive/close surgical margins or extra-uterine extension were treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT)±VBT. The median follow-up was 56 months. The overall survival (OS) was significantly different between LR and HR groups, and there was a trend between LR and HIR groups. Relapse-free survival (RFS) was significantly different between LR and HIR, LR and HR and IR and HR groups. There was no significant difference in OS and RFS rates between the HIR and HR groups. In HR patients, the OS and RFS rates were significantly higher in stage IB - grade 3 and stage II compared to stage III and non-endometrioid histology without any difference between the two uterine-confined stages and between stage III and non-endometrioid histology. The current risk grouping does not clearly discriminate the HIR and IR groups. In patients with comprehensive surgical staging, a further risk grouping is needed to distinguish the real HR group.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? The standard treatment for endometrial cancer (EC) is surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and/or chemotherapy is recommended according to risk factors. The recent European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) guideline have introduced a new risk group. However, the risk grouping is still quite heterogeneous.What do the results of this study add? This study demonstrated that the current risk grouping recommended by ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO does not clearly discriminate the intermediate risk (IR) and high-intermediate risk (HIR) groups.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Based on the results of this study, a new risk grouping can be made to discriminate HIR and IR groups clearly in patients with comprehensive surgical staging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Neuroendocrine tumors of the lungs are a clearly different group of tumors with definite ultrastructural, immunohistochemical, and molecular features. We reported and analyzed the incidence, clinicopathological features, surgery rates, responses to first-line therapy, and survival outcomes of this rare condition according to our lung cancer patient database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected the data of 62 patients who were histopathologically diagnosed with large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of lung (LCNEC) between January 2010 and January 2016. RESULTS: The patients were predominantly (95%) men (male:female=59:3) with their average age being 60.3±8.6 years. Diagnosis was made by the fine-needle aspiration biopsy (NAB) in 7 patients, bronchoscopic transbronchial biopsy in 13, and surgery in 42. Nearly 43.5% of the patients presented with the tumor in the right upper lobe. Additionally, tumors of 46.8% patients could be observed in peripheral locations. Sixteen patients presented with stage 1, 17 with stage 2, 15 with stage 3, and 14 with stage 4. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 29 months (SE: 12.2) (95% CI, 5.2-52.8 months). Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly better in patients with low N, M0, early stage, p63 positive, and TTF-1 positive across the entire cohort. Overall survival (OS) was significantly better in patients with comparatively lower N, M0, low stage, and peripheral location. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a single-center experience with clinicopathologic factors and survival outcomes of LCNEC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]