Araştırma Çıktıları

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11443/931

Browse

Author: search.filters.author.Er, OzlemSubject: search.filters.subject.Gastric cancer

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Real life experience of patients with locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a Turkish oncology group study
    (TAYLOR \& FRANCIS LTD, 2022-01-01) Basoglu, Tugba; Sakin, Abdullah; Erol, Cihan; Ozden, Ercan; cabuk, Devrim; Cilbir, Ebru; Tataroglu ozyukseler, Deniz; Ayhan, Murat; Sendur, Mehmet Ali; Dogan, Mutlu; Oksuzoglu, Berna; Eryilmaz, Melek Karakurt; Er, Ozlem; Tasci, Elif Senocak; Ozyurt, Neslihan; Dulgar, Ozgecan; Ozen, Mirac; Hacibekiroglu, Ilhan; Oner, Irem; Bekmez, Esma Turkmen; Cagri Yildirim, Hasan; Yalcin, Suayib; Paydas, Semra; Yekeduz, Emre; Aksoy, Asude; Ozcelik, Melike; Oyman, Abdilkerim; Almuradova, Elvina; Karabulut, Bulent; Demir, Nazan; Dincer, Murat; Ozdemir, Nuriye; Erdem, Dilek; Ak, Naziye; Inal, Ali; Salim, Derya Kivrak; Deniz, Gulhan Ipek; Sakalar, Teoman; Gulmez, Ahmet; Kacan, Turgut; Ozdemir, Ozlem; Alan, Ozkan; Unal, Caglar; Karakas, Yusuf; Turhal, Serdar; Yumuk, Perran Fulden
    Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric cancer (GC) was shown to improve survival in recent studies. We aimed to share our real-life experience of patients who received NACT to compare the efficacy and toxicity profile of different chemotherapy regimens in our country. This retrospective multicentre study included locally advanced GC and GEJ cancer patients who received NACT between 2007 and 2021. Relation between CT regimens and pathological evaluation were analysed. A total of 794 patients from 45 oncology centers in Turkey were included. Median age at the time of diagnosis was 60 (range: 18-86). Most frequent NACT regimens used were FLOT (65.4\%), DCF (17.4\%) and ECF (8.1\%), respectively. In the total study group, pathological complete remission (pCR) rate was 7.2\%, R0 resection rate 86.4\%, and D2 dissection rate was 66.8\%. Rate of pCR and near-CR (24\%), and R0 resection (84\%) were numerically higher in FLOT arm (p > 0.05). Patients who received FLOT had also higher chemotherapy-related toxicity rate compared to patients who received other regimens (p > 0.05). Median follow-up time was 16 months (range: 1-154 months). Estimated median overall survival (OS) was 58.4months (95\% CI: 35.2-85.7) and disease-free survival (DFS) was 50.7 months (95\% CI: 25.4-75.9). The highest 3-year estimated OS rate was also shown in FLOT arm (68\%). We still do not know which NACT regimen is the best choice for daily practice. Clinicians should tailor treatment regimens according to patients' multifactorial status and comorbidities for to obtain best outcomes. Longer follow-up period needs to validate our results.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    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, Istanbul
    The 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.