Browsing by Author "Demirci, A"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Examining Some Functional Characteristics in Subalpine Pure Oriental Spruce (Picea orientalis (L.) Link) Stands in Turkey
    Üçler, AÖ; Yücesan, Z; Oktan, E; Demirci, A; Yavuz, H; Gül, AU
    This study was carried out in order to state the functional differences between the pure oriental spruce stands in subalpine zone. In the research, the pure oriental spruce stands in the subalpine zone were evaluated according to their wood production (F1), erosion control (F2), water production (F3), grass productivity-wild life habitat (F4), scenic beauty (F5) and avalanche prevention (F6) functions. Functional characteristics were rated as a scalar value between 1 (the worst) and 5 ( the best) according to some observations, and exact differences were fixed between the functional characteristics of the treeline and the timberline stands. Determinations were realized in total of 46 sampling plots. 23 of the sampling plots were in treeline and 23 of them were in timberline. According to the results the F1, F2 and F6 values in the timberline were more effective than treeline stands. However F3, F4 and F5 values in the treeline were more effective than timber line stands. The average F1 value was 1.22 in the treeline and 3.04 in the timberline, F2 value was 3.0 in treeline and 3.61 in timberline, F3 value was 2.91 in the treeline and 2.43 in the timberline, F4 value was 3.35 in the treeline and 2.74 in the timberline, F5 value was 3.70 in treeline and 3.43 in timberline. Average F6 value was 3.52 in the treeline and 3.57 in the timberline. The functional values from treeline and timberline stands were compared by discriminant analysis and 41 of the sampling plots (89%) were estimated in their real groups.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Comparison of immunogenicity for Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine vs. natural infection during cancer treatment
    Çakir, E; Saydan, D; Gülbagci, B; Özen, M; Ugurlu, I; Demirci, A; Bilir, F; Hacibekiroglu, I; Yildiz, N; Akcali, S; Altindis, M; Varim, C; Yaylaci, S; Bilir, C
    - OBJECTIVE: Efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients, especially during their active treatment, are lacking. Most of the studies in the literature compared the immuni-ty in cancer patients with a cross-sectional cohort or retrospectively. Our study investigated Sino-vac-CoronaVac COVID-19 vaccine immunogenici-ty and compared it with natural COVID-19 disease in cancer patients during their cancer therapy.PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 111 pa-tients with cancer and who are on active treat-ment were included in the study. This is a sin-gle-center study and was designed prospec-tively. Two group of patients were included in the study, natural disease and vaccinated group.RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were in-cluded in the study, 34 of whom had natural COVID-19 disease. Antibody levels following the first dose vaccine were 0.4 (0-1.9) U/ml while af-ter the second dose of vaccine were 2.6 (1.0-7.25) U/ml. Immunogenicity levels were 82.4% in the natural disease group and 75.8% in the vaccinated group after the second shot of the vaccine. Immunogenicity rate was significantly higher in non-chemotherapy (receiving immu-notehrapy/targeted therapy or biologic agent) group compared to chemotherapy drug (92.9% vs. 63.3%, p=0.004). There was a difference be-tween the antibody levels following the first and second vaccination [median (IQR): 0.3 (0-1.0) and 3.3 (2.0-6.7), p=0.001, respectively].CONCLUSIONS: The present study revealed that the Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine showed an acceptable immunogenicity following two shots in cancer patients who were receiving ac-tive systemic therapy. On the other hand, nat-ural disease immunogenicity was higher than vaccinated group.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy (vol 23, 136, 2023)
    Karacin, C; Oksuzoglu, B; Demirci, A; Keskinkiliç, M; Baytemür, NK; Yilmaz, F; Selvi, O; Erdem, D; Avsar, E; Paksoy, N; Demir, N; Göksu, SS; Türker, S; Bayram, E; Çelebi, A; Yilmaz, H; Kuzu, ÖF; Kahraman, S; Gökmen, I; Sakin, A; Alkan, A; Nayir, E; Ugrakli, M; Acar, Ö; Ertürk, I; Demir, H; Aslan, F; Sönmez, Ö; Korkmaz, T; Celayir, ÖM; Karadag, I; Kayikçioglu, E; Sakalar, T; Öktem, IN; Eren, T; Erul, E; Mocan, EE; Kalkan, Z; Yildirim, N; Ergün, Y; Akagündüz, B; Karakaya, S; Kut, E; Teker, F; Demirel, BÇ; Karaboyun, K; Almuradova, E; Ünal, OÜ; Oyman, A; Isik, D; Okutur, K; Öztosun, B; Gülbagci, BB; Kalender, ME; Sahin, E; Seyyar, M; Özdemir, Ö; Selçukbiricik, F; Kanitez, M; Dede, I; Gümüs, M; Gökmen, E; Yaren, A; Menekse, S; Ebinç, S; Aksoy, S; Imamoglu, GI; Altinbas, M; Çetin, B; Uluç, BO; Er, Ö; Karadurmus, N; Erdogan, AP; Artaç, M; Tanriverdi, Ö; Çiçin, I; Sendur, MAN; Oktay, E; Bayoglu, IV; Paydas, S; Aydiner, A; Salim, DK; Geredeli, Ç; Yavuzsen, T; Dogan, M; Hacibekiroglu, I
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Efficacy of subsequent treatments in patients with hormone-positive advanced breast cancer who had disease progression under CDK 4/6 inhibitor therapy
    Karacin, C; Oksuzoglu, B; Demirci, A; Keskinkiliç, M; Baytemür, NK; Yilmaz, F; Selvi, O; Erdem, D; Avsar, E; Paksoy, N; Demir, N; Göksu, SS; Türker, S; Bayram, E; Çelebi, A; Yilmaz, H; Kuzu, ÖF; Kahraman, S; Gökmen, I; Sakin, A; Alkan, A; Nayir, E; Ugrakli, M; Acar, Ö; Ertürk, I; Demir, H; Aslan, F; Sönmez, Ö; Korkmaz, T; Celayir, ÖM; Karadag, I; Kayikçioglu, E; Sakalar, T; Öktem, IN; Eren, T; Urul, E; Mocan, EE; Kalkan, Z; Yildirim, N; Ergün, Y; Akagündüz, B; Karakaya, S; Kut, E; Teker, F; Demirel, BÇ; Karaboyun, K; Almuradova, E; Ünal, OÜ; Oyman, A; Isik, D; Okutur, K; Öztosun, B; Gülbagci, BB; Kalender, ME; Sahin, E; Seyyar, M; Özdemir, Ö; Selçukbiricik, F; Kanitez, M; Dede, I; Gümüs, M; Gökmen, E; Yaren, A; Menekse, S; Ebinç, S; Aksoy, S; Imamoglu, GI; Altinbas, M; Çetin, B; Uluç, BO; Er, Ö; Karadurmus, N; Erdogan, AP; Artaç, M; Tanriverdi, Ö; Çiçin, I; Sendur, MAN; Oktay, E; Bayoglu, IV; Paydas, S; Aydiner, A; Salim, DK; Geredeli, Ç; Yavuzsen, T; Dogan, M; Hacibekiroglu, I
    Background There is no standard treatment recommended at category 1 level in international guidelines for subsequent therapy after cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6) based therapy. We aimed to evaluate which subsequent treatment oncologists prefer in patients with disease progression under CDKi. In addition, we aimed to show the effectiveness of systemic treatments after CDKi and whether there is a survival difference between hormonal treatments (monotherapy vs. mTOR-based). Methods A total of 609 patients from 53 centers were included in the study. Progression-free-survivals (PFS) of subsequent treatments (chemotherapy (CT, n:434) or endocrine therapy (ET, n:175)) after CDKi were calculated. Patients were evaluated in three groups as those who received CDKi in first-line (group A, n:202), second-line (group B, n: 153) and >= 3rd-line (group C, n: 254). PFS was compared according to the use of ET and CT. In addition, ET was compared as monotherapy versus everolimus-based combination therapy. Results The median duration of CDKi in the ET arms of Group A, B, and C was 17.0, 11.0, and 8.5 months in respectively; it was 9.0, 7.0, and 5.0 months in the CT arm. Median PFS after CDKi was 9.5 (5.0-14.0) months in the ET arm of group A, and 5.3 (3.9-6.8) months in the CT arm (p = 0.073). It was 6.7 (5.8-7.7) months in the ET arm of group B, and 5.7 (4.6-6.7) months in the CT arm (p = 0.311). It was 5.3 (2.5-8.0) months in the ET arm of group C and 4.0 (3.5-4.6) months in the CT arm (p = 0.434). Patients who received ET after CDKi were compared as those who received everolimus-based combination therapy versus those who received monotherapy ET: the median PFS in group A, B, and C was 11.0 vs. 5.9 (p = 0.047), 6.7 vs. 5.0 (p = 0.164), 6.7 vs. 3.9 (p = 0.763) months. Conclusion Physicians preferred CT rather than ET in patients with early progression under CDKi. It has been shown that subsequent ET after CDKi can be as effective as CT. It was also observed that better PFS could be achieved with the subsequent everolimus-based treatments after first-line CDKi compared to monotherapy ET.