Browsing by Author "Elkiran E.T."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Gemcitabine Alone versus combination of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin for the Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Pancreatic Carcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis of multicenter study
    (SAP - Slovak Academic Press, spol. s.r.o., 2012) Inal A.; Kos F.T.; Algin E.; Yildiz R.; Dikiltas M.; Unek I.T.; Colak D.; Elkiran E.T.; Helvaci K.; Geredeli C.; Dane F.; Balakan O.; Kaplan M.A.; Durnali A.G.; Harputoglu H.; Goksel G.; Ozdemir N.; Buyukberber S.; Gumus M.; Kucukoner M.; Ozkan M.; Uncu D.; Benekli M.; Isikdogan A.
    The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer is of advanced disease. Several randomized Phase II and III trials suggest that the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) response rates were higher than Gemcitabine (Gem) alone, however the trials were not enough powered to indicate a statistically significant prolongation of survival in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study is to evaluated the efficiency of Gem alone versus GemCis in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A total of 406 patients, from fourteen centers were evaluated retrospectively. All patients received Gem or GemCis as first-line treatment between September 2005 to March 2011. Primary end of this study were to evaluate the toxicity, clinical response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between the arms. There were 156 patients (M: 98, F: 58) in Gem arm and 250 patients (M: 175, F: 75) in the combination arm. Gemcitabin arm patients older than the combination arm (median 63 vs 57.5, p=0.001). In patients with the combination arm had a higher dose reduction (25.2% vs 11.3%, p=0.001) and dose delay (34% vs 16.8%, p=0.001). Among patients with the combination and Gemcitabin arm gender, diabetes mellitus, performance status, cholestasis, grade, stage did not have a statistically difference (p>0.05). Clinical response rate to the combination arm was higher than the Gem arm (69.0% vs 49.7%, p=0.001). PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance (8.9 vs 6.0, p=0.08). OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm (12.0 vs 10.2, p>0.05). Grade III-IV hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity were higher in the combination arm. PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance. OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    The effect of the gastrectomy on survival in patients with metastatic gastric cancer: A study of ASMO
    (Future Medicine Ltd., 2016) Yazici O.; Özdemir N.; Duran A.O.; Menekşe S.; Nahit Şendur M.A.; Karaca H.; Göksel G.; Arpaci E.; Hacibekiroʇlu I.; Bilgetekin I.; Kaçan T.; Özkan M.; Aksoy S.; Aksoy A.; Çokmert S.; Uysal M.; Elkiran E.T.; Çiçin I.; Büyükberber S.; Zengin N.
    Aim: To investigate the role of surgical resection of primary tumor on overall survival (OS) in advanced gastric cancer patients at the time of diagnosis. Patients & methods: The survival rates of metastatic gastric cancer patients whose gastric primary tumor was resected at time of diagnosis were compared with metastatic gastric cancer patients whose primary tumor was nonresected. Results: The median progression-free survival and OS in operated and nonoperated group were 10 versus 6, 14 versus 9 months, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, gastric resection of primary tumor, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, second-line chemotherapy had a significant effect on OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52 [95% CI: 0.38-0.71], HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.42-0.78], HR: 1.48 [1.09-2.01]; p ≤ 0.001, p = 0.001 and p = 0.012, respectively). Conclusion: Subpopulations of patients with metastatic gastric cancer might benefit from surgical removal of primary tumor. © 2016 Future Medicine Ltd.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Is eribulin treatment prognostic factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with this drug? Retrospective analysis of a multicentre study
    (Zerbinis Publications, 2019) Oruc Z.; Kaplan M.A.; Geredeli C.; Sari N.Y.; Ozaslan E.; Aytekin A.; Elkiran E.T.; Koca S.; Dogan M.; Turan N.; Yuce O.; Sevinc A.; Ercelep O.; Isikdogan A.
    Purpose: This study aimed to analyze prognostic factors for survival and the reliability and the effectiveness of eribulin therapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Methods: A total of 80 patients treated with eribulin in 12 medical oncology centers in Turkey between 2013-2017 were retrospectively evaluated. Sixteen potential prognostic variables were assessed for analysis. Results: The patients had received a median of 5 prior chemotherapy regimens and a median of 3 eribulin cycles for MBC. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.5 months (95% Cl: 4.1-7.8) and median overall survival (OS) was 11 months (95 % Cl: 6-15). Multivariate analysis showed that eribulin treatment line was shown to have independent prognostic significance for PFS. PFS difference was demostrated in patients who received 3 chemotherapy lines for advanced disease compared to those who had more than 3 chemotherapy lines [median PFS; 3 lines: 8.6 months (6.2-11) and >3 lines: 4.6 months (3.7-4.6) p=0.00]. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 52.5 and 35% in patients treated with three lines and with >3 previous chemotherapeutic regimens. Most common toxicities were neutropenia (62.5%), fatigue (52.5%), alopecia (50%) and nausea (37.5%). Conclusions: Eribulin treatment line was identified as in-depedent prognostic factor for PFS in MBC patients. © 2019 Zerbinis Publications. All rights reserved.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Is eribulin treatment prognostic factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with this drug? Retrospective analysis of a multicentre study
    (Zerbinis Publications, 2020) Oruc Z.; Kaplan M.A.; Geredeli C.; Sari N.Y.; Ozaslan E.; Aytekin A.; Elkiran E.T.; Koca S.; Dogan M.; Turan N.; Yuce O.; Sevinc A.; Ercelep O.; Isikdogan A.
    Purpose: This study aimed to analyze prognostic factors for survival and the reliability and the effectiveness of eribulin therapy in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. Methods: A total of 80 patients treated with eribulin in 12 medical oncology centers in Turkey between 2013-2017 were retrospectively evaluated. Sixteen potential prognostic variables were assessed for analysis. Results: The patients had received a median of 5 prior chemotherapy regimens and a median of 3 eribulin cycles for MBC. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.5 months (95% Cl: 4.1-7.8) and median overall survival (OS) was 11 months (95 % Cl: 6-15). Multivariate analysis showed that eribulin treatment line was shown to have independent prognostic significance for PFS. PFS difference was demostrated in patients who received 3 chemotherapy lines for advanced disease compared to those who had more than 3 chemotherapy lines [median PFS; 3 lines: 8.6 months (6.2-11) and >3 lines: 4.6 months (3.7-4.6) p=0.00]. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 52.5 and 35% in patients treated with three lines and with >3 previous chemotherapeutic regimens. Most common toxicities were neutropenia (62.5%), fatigue (52.5%), alopecia (50%) and nausea (37.5%). Conclusions: Eribulin treatment line was identified as indepedent prognostic factor for PFS in MBC patients. © 2020 Zerbinis Publications. All rights reserved.