Browsing by Author "Civelek, Burak"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and Fluorouracil Combination in Nenadjuvant Setting in The Treatment of Locally Advanced Gastric Adenocarcinorna: A Phase II NEOT Study
(2014) Ozdemir, Nuriye; Aball, Huseyin; Vural, Murat; Yalcin, Suayib; Olcsuzoglu, Barna; Oguz, Dilek; Bostanci, Birol; Civelek, Burak; Yalcin, Bulent; Zengin, Nurullah; HIK-0062-2022; HIK-0062-2022
Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and Fluorouracil Combination in Neoadjuvant Setting in The Treatment of Locally Advanced Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Phase II NEOTAX Study
(2014) Ozdemir, Nuriye; Abali, Huseyin; Vural, Murat; Yalcin, Suayib; Oksuzoglu, Berna; Civelek, Burak; Oguz, Dilek; Bostanci, Birol; Yalcin, Bulent; Zengin, Nurullah; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5596-0920; 25234436; D-7660-2016
This phase II trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) combination in neoadjuvant setting in patients with locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma. Fifty-nine patients with resectable or unresectable locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal cancer were recruited in this multicenter, single-arm, open-label, local clinical phase II study conducted at three centers from Turkey between June 2006 and March 2012. Patients had T3-4 or lymph node-positive disease. After staging with imaging and laparotomy or laparoscopy, they received three cycles of DCF with lenograstim. Imaging studies were repeated after the last two cycles. Patients who underwent surgery were followed up for at least 1 year after the surgery. Toxicity and response were evaluated in accordance with NCI-CTC version3.0 and RECIST 1.0. At baseline, 66.1 % of patients were considered resectable. In 47 patients evaluable, partial response in 16 (34.0 %), stable disease in 27 (57.5 %), and progressive disease in four (8.5 %) were observed. Forty-six patients underwent surgery. In 38 (64.4 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 52.2-76.6 %) out of 59 patients, complete resection (R0) was achieved. Median overall and disease-free survival were 19.1 months (95 % CI 13.5-24.7) and 11.6 months (95 % CI 5.9-17.4), respectively. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (52.5 %), febrile neutropenia (11.9 %), leukopenia (39.0 %), and diarrhea (10.5 %). One patient died from an unknown cause. Classical DCF triplet with lenograstim showed a good clinical response with acceptable safety profile in the treatment of locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal cancer with a significant R0 rate and manageable toxicity.
Effect of Port-Care Frequency on Venous Port Catheter-Related Complications in Cancer Patients
(2014) Odabas, Hatice; Ozdemir, Nuriye Yildirim; Ziraman, Ipek; Aksoy, Sercan; Abali, Huseyin; Oksuzoglu, Berna; Isik, Metin; Civelek, Burak; Dede, Dogan; Zengin, Nurullah; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5596-0920; 23978939; D-7660-2016
Subcutaneous central venous port catheters (SCVPC) are of great importance in the treatment of patients with malignancies since they provide secure vascular access. Our aim was to assess the impact of long-term catheter care frequency on the frequency of port-related complications. Two hundred and seven patients who had not been on active chemotherapy through their SCVPC for at least 3 months were enrolled into the study. Those who received catheter care every 3 months or more frequently were assigned to the frequent care group, and the others to the infrequent care group. The patients were examined for port-related complications and thrombosis including port occlusion. Routinely in our clinic, catheter care was done by using 300 IU of heparin. According to the frequency of SCVPC care, 49 (23.7 %) patients were in the frequent care group and 158 (76.3 %) were in the infrequent care group. Median follow-up of all patients was 671 days (range 133-1712). Median frequency of port care in the frequent care group was 90 days (range 30-90), but 441.5 days in the infrequent care group (range 91-1630). None of the patients experienced port-related severe complications during the follow-up time. None of them presented with port occlusion. When the groups were analysed for thrombus (symptomatic and asymptomatic), there was no statistically significant difference (6.4 vs 13.8 %, p = 0.17). Those patients who had received more than first-line chemotherapy were found to have more thrombi than the patients who were treated with only one type of chemotherapy protocol (28.6 vs 10.2 %, p = 0.01), and the patients who had metastatic disease at the last control were found out to have thrombi more frequently than the non-metastatic patients (24.3 vs 9.3 %) (p = 0.01). In the present study, there was no difference in port-related severe complications between frequent and infrequent care groups during follow-up. However, the rate of thrombosis was slightly higher in the infrequent port care group.