WOS
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11443/932
Browse
5 results
Search Results
Item Changes in radiotherapy practice during COVID-19 outbreak in Turkey: A report from the Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology(ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD, 2020-01-01) Anacak, Yavuz; Onal, Cem; Ozyigit, Gokhan; Agaoglu, Fulya; Akboru, Halil; Akyurek, Serap; Gursel, Bilge; Igdem, Sefik; Yalman, Deniz; Yildiz, Ferah; Saglam, Esra KaytanItem Evaluation of the relationship between serum ghrelin levels and cancer cachexia in patients with locally advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy(WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS, 2020-01-01) Uysal, Pelin; Afsar, Cigdem Usul; Sozer, Volkan; Inanc, Berrin; Agaoglu, Fulya; Gural, Zeynep; Fazlioglu, Nevin Gural; Cuhadaroglu, Caglar; Uzun, HafizeBackground: Ghrelin plays a role in mechanisms related to cancer progression - including cell proliferation, invasion and migration, and resistance to apoptosis in the cell lines from several cancers. We investigated the role of ghrelin levels in cancer cachexia-anorexia in patients with locally advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Materials and Methods: This study involved 84 NSCLC patients who had received concomitant CRT. Blood ghrelin levels were compared before and 3 months after CRT. Meanwhile, changes in body weight of the patients were also investigated with changes in ghrelin levels before and after CRT. Results: Ghrelin levels were significantly decreased in line with changes in patients' weights in patients receiving CRT (P < 0.001). Serum albumin levels and inflammatory-nutritional index were significantly decreased after radiotherapy (RT) (3.01 0.40 g/dL, 0.38 +/- 0.20) when compared with its baseline levels (3.40 +/- 0.55 g/dL,P < 0.001Item Dealing with the gray zones in the management of gastric cancer: The consensus statement of the Istanbul Group(AVES, 2019-01-01) Aytac, Erman; Aslan, Fatih; Cicek, Bahattin; Erdamar, Sibel; Gurses, Bengi; Guven, Koray; Falay, Okan; Karahasanoglu, Tayfun; Selcukbiricik, Fatih; Selek, Ugur; Atalar, Banu; Balik, Emre; Tozun, Nurdan; Rozanes, Izzet; Arican, Ali; Hamzaoglu, Ismail; Baca, Bilgi; Mandell, Nil Molinas; Saruc, Murat; Goksel, Suha; Demir, Gokhan; Agaoglu, Fulya; Yakicier, Cengiz; Ozbek, Ugur; Ozben, Volkan; Ozyar, Enis; Guner, Ahmet Levent; Er, Ozlem; Kaban, Kerim; Bolukbasi, Yasemin; Bugra, Dursun; Ahishali, Emel; Asian, Fatih; Boz-bas, Aysun; Hamzaoglu, Hulya; Karaman, Ahmet; Kucukmetin, Nurten Turkel; Vardareli, Eser Kutsal; Onder, Fatih Oguz; Sisman, Gurhan; Tiftikci, Arzu; Unal, Hakan Umit; Yapali, Suna; Acar, Sami; Agcaoglu, Orhan; Aghayeva, Afag; Akyuz, Ali; Atasoy, Deniz; Batik, Emre; Bayraktar, Ilknur Erenler; Bayram, Onur; Bilgic, Cagri; Bilgin, Ismail Ahmet; Can, Ugur; Dulgeroglu, Onur; Durukan, Ugur; Gencosmanoglu, Rasim; Gonenc, Murat; Gurbuz, Bulent; Kaya, Mesut; Omarov, Nail; Ozben, Volkan; Ozgur, Ilker; Ozoran, Emre; Sobutay, Erman; Uras, Cihan; Uymaz, Derya; Zenger, Serkan; Ozbek, Ugur; Yakicier, M. Cengiz; Afsar, Cigdem Usul; Bozkurt, Mustafa; Demir, Atakan; Er, Ozlem; Kanitez, Metin; Korkmaz, Taner; Mandel, Nil Molina; Mert, Askhan Guven; Ozer, Leyla; Sonmez, Ozlem; Tunali, Didem; Uluc, Basak Oyan; Yazar, Aziz; Yildiz, Ibrahim; Demirkurek, Cengiz; Guner, Ahmet Levent; Vardareli, Erkan; Armutlu, Aye; Baba, Fisun; Ersozlu, Ilker; Kapran, Yersu; Sahin, Davut; Abacioglu, Mehmet Ufuk; Bese, Nuran; Durankus, Nilufer Kilic; Gural, Zeynep; Ozyar, Enis; Sengoz, Meric; Sezen, Duygu; Caliskan, Can; Guven, Koray; Karaaslan, Ercan; Kizilkaya, Esref; Suleyman, Erdogan; Grp, IstanbulThe geographical location and differences in tumor biology significantly change the management of gastric cancer. The prevalence of gastric cancer ranks fifth and sixth among men and women, respectively, in Turkey. The international guidelines from the Eastern and Western countries fail to manage a considerable amount of inconclusive issues in the management of gastric cancer. The uncertainties lead to significant heterogeneities in clinical practice, lack of homogeneous data collection, and subsequently, diverse outcomes. The physicians who are professionally involved in the management of gastric cancer at two institutions in Istanbul, Turkey, organized a consensus meeting to address current problems and plan feasible, logical, measurable, and collective solutions in their clinical practice for this challenging disease. The evidence-based data and current guidelines were reviewed. The gray zones in the management of gastric cancer were determined in the first session of this consensus meeting. The second session was constructed to discuss, vote, and ratify the ultimate decisions. The identification of the T stage, the esophagogastric area, imaging algorithm for proper staging and follow-up, timing and patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment, and management of advanced and metastatic disease have been accepted as the major issues in the management of gastric cancer. The recommendations are presented with the percentage of supporting votes in the results section with related data.Item Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Planning at Mediastinal Lymphoma Treatment: Sandglass, Rainbow and Butterfly Techniques(KARE PUBL, 2022-01-01) Yucel, Serap; Gural, Zeynep; Agaoglu, FulyaOBJECTIVE We developed ``sandglass{''} technique using volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) with two avoidance sectors and make comparison between two intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques, ``butterfly{''} with three anterior and two posterior beams, and ``rainbow{''} with five anterior beams. Conformity index (CI), homogeneity index MD, organ of risk doses, and monitor unit (MU) values are used as evaluation tools. METHODS IMRT and VMAT plans generated for 15 mediastinal lymphoma patients. Sandglass technique consists of two full arc with avoidance sectors (240 degrees-300 degrees and 60 degrees-120 degrees), butterfly technique with five static fields (0 degrees, 40 degrees, 160 degrees,190 degrees, and 330 degrees), and rainbow technique has five static fields (0 degrees, 20 degrees, 40 degrees, 320 degrees, and 345 degrees). The prescribed treatment dose was 30.6 Gy in 17 fractions. Dosirnetric data were compared using cross-paired sample t-test. RESULTS Lung V5 doses were 41.62-50.74\%, V20 doses were 12.72-16.21\%, heart mean doses were between 454 and 509 cGy, spinal cord max point doses were between 2210 and 2798 cGy, esophagus mean doses were between 1309 and 1409 eGyHI, CI, and MU values were calculated. Lung V20, mean esophagus, and mean heart and spinal cord max. point doses were observed significantly lower at sandglass technique (p=0.001, p=0.02, p=0.013, and p=0.001). CI is significantly better than other two techniques (rainbow p=0.000 and butterfly p=0.001). On the other hand, lung V5 doses significantly lower at rainbow technique (p=0.035), besides, III has significant advantage with respect to others. Sandglass has lower MU value with 484 MU. CONCLUSION Sandglass technique has remarkable advantageous for lung V20, heart, esophagus, spinal cord, CI, and MU. Treatment plans with lower critical organ doses have great importance in terms of late side effects in patients with long survival expectancy. Sandglass plan was preferable for mediastinal lymphoma.Item Stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) for the treatment of liver metastases in oligometastatic patients: initial clinical experience(KOREAN SOC THERAPEUTIC RADIOLOGY \& ONCOLOGY, 2021-01-01) Ugurluer, Gamze; Mustafayev, Teuta Zoto; Gungor, Gorkem; Atalar, Banu; Abacioglu, Ufuk; Sengoz, Meric; Agaoglu, Fulya; Demir, Gokhan; Ozyar, EnisPurpose: We aimed to present our initial clinical experience on the implementation of a stereotactic MR-guided online adaptive radiation therapy (SMART) for the treatment of liver metastases in oligometastatic disease. Materials and Methods: Twenty-one patients (24 lesions) with liver metastasis treated with SMART were included in this retrospective study. Step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy technique was used with daily plan adaptation. During delivery, real-time imaging was used by acquiring planar magnetic resonance images in sagittal plane for monitoring and gating. Acute and late toxicities were recorded both during treatment and follow-up visits. Results: The median follow-up time was 11.6 months (range, 2.2 to 24.6 months). The median delivered total dose was 50 Gy (range, 40 to 60 Gy)