Browsing by Author "Ergen, Sefika Arzu"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

The Comparision of Breast Cancer in the Young and Elderly Patients
(2019) Petek Erpolat, Ozge; Yuce Sari, Sezin; Ergen, Sefika Arzu; Aydin, Barbaros; Akkus, Berna; Gultekin, Melis; Copan Oksuz, Didem; Arican, Zumre; Onal, Cem; Gursel, Bilge; Akmansu, Muge; Ozyigit, Gokhan; Bilkay Gorken, Ilknur; Yildiz, Ferah
OBJECTIVE To compare the tumor characteristics, treatment approaches, recurrence patterns and survival results rates of young and elderly patients with breast cancer. METHODS In this study, Between between 2000-2013, a total of 779 patients were treated for breast cancer at nine radiation oncology departments were evaluated retrospectively. Three-hundred eight four of these patients were young (<= 35 years), and 395 of those the patients were elderly (>= 70 years). RESULTS Young patients were more likely to present with aggressive tumor features. They were more often received comprehensive lymphatic irradiation, tumor bed boost and intense chemotherapy. No difference was found for 5 and 10-year loco-regional recurrence- free survival rates were (96% and 93% for young, 97% and 97% for elderly). The 5 and 10-year distant recurrence- free survival rates were lower in the young patients (77% and 67% for young, 85% and 85% for elderly, p<0.0001). No difference was found in 5 and 10-year breast cancer- specific survival (91% and 79% for young, 92% and 87% for elderly). The 5 and 10-year overall survival rates were higher in the young patients (92% and 78% for young, 78% and 63% for elderly, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION The reason for the similarity between the age groups in terms ofregarding loco-regional recurrence- free survival can be more comprehensive lymphatic irradiation and tumor bed boost, the young patients received. The distant recurrence- free survival rates rates were significantly lower in the young patients even though they received more intensive chemotherapy. Future studies aimed at more effective systemic regimens to decrease distant recurrence in young patients are warranted.
Restaging of Cervical Cancer Patients Treated with Adjuvant Radiotherapy According to FIGO 2018 and Suggestions for the Next Staging: Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology Gynecologic Group Study (TROD 04-004)
(2022) Alanyali, Senem; Balci, Beril; Esen, Caglayan Selenge Beduk; Gultekin, Melis; Yildirim, Berna Akkus; Ozkurt, Selnur; Ergen, Sefika Arzu; Gursel, Sukriye Bilge; Cetin, Ilknur Alsan; Sert, Fatma; Sari, Sezin Yuce; Ibis, Kamuran; Onal, Cem; Sahinler, Ismet; Yildiz, Ferah; Ozsaran, Zeynep
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to compare Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 and 2018 staging systems in patients with uterine cervical cancer. METHODS Medical records of 571 patients who were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy between 2001 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates according to FIGO 2009 and FIGO 2018 staging systems were compared using the log-rank test. Cox regression model was used to identify independent prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS The median follow-up was 59 months. Five-year OS and PFS rates were 81.1% and 77.7%, respectively. Stage migration was recorded in 401 patients (70.2%) and the most remarkable stage migration was detected in stage I patients (60%). A total of 157 (27.5%) patients upstaged to stage IIIC disease. According to FIGO 2009, 5-year OS rates were 87.3%, 80.5% (p=0.076), and PFS rates were 82.8%, 77.5% (p=0.036) for stage IB1 and IB2, respectively. According to FIGO 2018, the 5-year OS rates for stage IB1, IB2, and IB3 were 89.8%, 87.1%, and 81.4% (p=0.310), and PFS rates were 90.2%, 80.5%, and 80.1% (p=0.189), respectively. Patients with >= 2 pelvic lymph node (LN) metastases had worse 5-year OS and PFS rates than patients with one metastasis (p=0.015 and p=0.006). Number of para-aortic LN metastasis and metastatic LN ratio (MLNR) were also correlated with 5-year OS and PFS. CONCLUSION Current FIGO staging system better discriminates patients with cervical cancer. However, integration of metastatic LN number and/or MLNR to the upcoming FIGO staging system may improve the prognostic value of the staging.
Role of vaginal brachytherapy boost following adjuvant external beam radiotherapy in cervical cancer: Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology Gynecologic Group Study (TROD 04-002)
(2021) Gultekin, Melis; Esen, Caglayan Selenge Beduk; Balci, Beril; Alanyali, Senem; Yildirim, Berna Akkus; Guler, Ozan Cem; Sari, Sezin Yuce; Ergen, Sefika Arzu; Sahinler, Ismet; Cetin, Ilknur Alsan; Onal, Cem; Yildiz, Ferah; Ozsaran, Zeynep; 0000-0002-2742-9021; 0000-0001-6661-4185; 0000-0001-6908-3412; 32998860; D-5195-2014; V-5717-2017; AAC-5654-2020
Objective There are a limited number of studies supporting vaginal brachytherapy boost to external beam radiotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of cervical cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the addition of vaginal brachytherapy boost to adjuvant external beam radiotherapy on oncological outcomes and toxicity in patients with cervical cancer. Methods Patients treated with post-operative external beam radiotherapy +/- chemotherapy +/- vaginal brachytherapy between January 2001 and January 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. The treatment outcomes and prognostic factors were analyzed in patients treated with external beam radiotherapy with or without vaginal brachytherapy. Results A total of 480 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 51 years (range 42-60). At least two intermediate risk factors were observed in 51% of patients, while 49% had at least one high-risk factor. The patients in the external beam radiotherapy + vaginal brachytherapy group had worse prognostic factors than the external beam radiotherapy alone group. With a median follow-up time of 56 months (range 33-90), the 5-year overall survival rate was 82%. There was no difference in 5-year overall survival (87% vs 79%, p=0.11), recurrence-free survival (74% vs 71%, p=0.49), local recurrence-free survival (78% vs 76%, p=0.16), and distant metastasis-free survival (85% vs 76%, p=0.09) rates between treatment groups. There was no benefit of addition of vaginal brachytherapy to external beam radiotherapy in patients with positive surgical margins. In multivariate analysis, stage (overall survival and local recurrence-free survival), tumor histology (recurrence-free survival, local recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival), parametrial invasion (recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival), lymphovascular space invasion (recurrence-free survival), and lymph node metastasis (distant metastasis-free survival) were found as negative prognostic factors. Conclusion Adding vaginal brachytherapy boost to external beam radiotherapy did not provide any benefit in local control or survival in patients with cervical cancer.