PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/4810

Browse

Filters

2021 - 20232

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Cetin, Ilknur AlsanHas files: No

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Oncological Outcomes For Encapsulated Papillary Carcinoma Of The Breast: Multicentric Study Of Turkish Society For Radiation Oncology Breast Cancer Study Group (TROD 06-014 Study)
    (2023) Gurdal, Necla; Yildirim, Berna Akkus; Gursel, Ozge Kandemir; Ozkurt, Selnur; Ibis, Kamuran; Gultekin, Melis; Tepetam, Huseyin; Gul, Sule Karabulut; Guzeloz, Zeliha; Oksuz, Didem Colpan; Cetin, Ilknur Alsan; Yalcin, Berrin; Duzova, Mursel; Kanyilmaz, Gul; Yavas, Guler; Ozsaran, Zeynep; 36464924
    BackgroundEncapsulated papillary carcinoma (EPC) is a rare malignant papillary breast cancer accounting for approximately .5%-2% of all breast tumors. The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate clinicopathologic features of EPC in addition to oncological outcomes and radiotherapy (RT) details. MethodsFrom 10 different academic hospitals in Turkey, we obtained pathology reports of 80 patients with histologically confirmed EPC between 2005 and 2022. Demographic, diagnostic, and treatment data were collected from medical records, retrospectively. Local failure, distant progression, toxicity-adverse effects, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival were evaluated, and survival analyzes were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. ResultsEighty patients with the diagnosis of misspelled sorry (ECP) were retrospectively evaluated. The median age of the patients was 63 (range, 35-85). After a median follow-up of 48 (range; 6-206) months, local recurrence was observed in three patients (4%). Local recurrence was less common in the patients who received whole breast RT with a tumour bed boost (p = .025). There were not any distant metastasis or disease-related death. RT was applied to 61% of the cases, and no treatment-related grade 3 or higher toxicity was reported in any of the patients. Five year OS, cancer-specific survival (CSS), and were observed as 85%, 100%, and 96%, respectively. ConclusionsECP is a rare, slow-progressing breast carcinoma associated with good prognosis, it is a disease of elderly patient, and usually occurs in postmenopausal women. It responds extremely well to optimal local treatments and appropriate adjuvant treatments on a patient basis, and has excellent OS and CSS ratios.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    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.