Person: ARIKAN, RUKİYE
Loading...
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
ARIKAN
First Name
RUKİYE
Name
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Publication Metadata only Real-world assessment of quality-of-life in patients with breast cancer treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy(2022-07-01) ARIKAN, RUKİYE; BAŞOĞLU TÜYLÜ, TUĞBA; DANE, FAYSAL; YUMUK, PERRAN FULDEN; KÖSTEK, OSMAN; AKIN TELLİ T., ÖZTÜRK M. S., Alan O., Hasanov R., KÖSTEK O., Arikan R., BAŞOĞLU TÜYLÜ T., Kaya S., Ercelep O., Babacan N. A., et al.Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate quality-of-life (QoL) in breast cancer (BC) patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET). Methods: We designed a cross-sectional study of 233 BC patients treated with AET and used the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast questionnaire. Results: No significant difference was observed between endocrine agents. Duration of AET did not affect QoL. In the entire cohort, multivariate analysis determined age (p = 0.034) and switching treatment from tamoxifen to aromatase inhibitors (p = 0.049) as significant positive coefficients of QoL, while comorbidity (p = 0.072) tended to be associated with lower scores. Education level (p = 0.001) and chemotherapy (p = 0.04) were significant predictors of QoL in the tamoxifen group, while comorbidity (p = 0.04), surgery type (p = 0.02), radiotherapy (p = 0.006) and stage (p = 0.009) had a significant impact on QoL in aromatase inhibitors group. Conclusion: Evaluating the well-being of BC patients by QoL questionnaires is of great importance to identify particular subgroups that may require supportive care.Publication Metadata only Is the benefit of using adjuvant capecitabine in patients with residual triple-negative breast cancer related to pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy(2022-01-01) ARIKAN, RUKİYE; Dulgar O., Oven B. B., Atci M. M., Arikan R., Ay S., Ayhan M., Selvi O., Ozyukseler D. T., Bayram E., ÖZCAN E., et al.Background Triple-negative-breast-cancer (TNBC) has a poor prognosis if pathologic complete response (pCR) cannot be achieved following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The group of patients that benefit most from adjuvant capecitabine remains unclear. Materials and Methods We analyzed data of 160 consecutive patients with residual TNBC from eight cancer-center. Pathologic response was defined into two groups as having good-pathologic-response (MillerPayneGrading (MPG) IV-III) or poor-pathologic-response (MPG I-II). The characteristics of patients were compared regarding adjuvant capecitabine usage. Results Univariate-analysis revealed that age, histology, clinical-stage, tumor-size, lymph-nodes number, menopausal status, and pathological-stage were significantly different between two groups. In multivariate-analysis, menopausal status (p = 0.043) and residual tumor-size (p < 0.001) were found to be independent prognostic factors for pathological response. The hazard-ratio for disease recurrence and death in the poor-response group with adjuvant capecitabine was 2.94 (95% confidence-interval (CI), 1.21 to 7.10; p = 0.016) and 4.080 (95% CI, 1.22 to 13.64; p = 0.022), respectively. DFS (p = 0.58) and OS (p = 0.89) improvements with adjuvant capecitabine were not demonstrated in good-response groups. Conclusion This multicenter-study suggested that only the poor-response group to NAC achieved benefit from adjuvant capecitabine. Postmenopausal status and residual tumor-size were related to poor prognosis.Publication Metadata only Prognostic Factors Associated with Resected Osteosarcoma: Efficacy of Adjuvant Setting, Real-World Experience(2024-01-01) ŞİMŞEK, FATİH; SEVER, NADİYE; KOCAASLAN, ERKAM; EREL, PINAR; ARIKAN, RUKİYE; SARI, MURAT; BAYOĞLU, İBRAHİM VEDAT; KÖSTEK, OSMAN; Majidova N., ŞİMŞEK F., Biter S., YASLIKAYA Ş., Seyyar M., DUYGULU M. E., Arcagok M., Kircali M. F., Sever N., KOCAASLAN E., et al.Osteosarcoma is a curable tumor. Surgery is performed after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the primary standard treatment, followed by adjuvant therapy again. However, it is seen in patients who have undergone surgery without neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant treatment is always given in this group. However, it is controversial how many cycles of adjuvant treatment should be given. In our study, 42 patients with osteosarcoma who received only adjuvant treatment without neoadjuvant treatment were analyzed for the effects of epidemiologic factors, treatment regimens on overall survival and disease-free survival. Retrospectively, 42 osteosarcoma patients (5 centers) with a current age of 18years and older who were followed up between 2001-2022 were examined. Twenty-five (60.0%) were below 8 cm, and 16 (38.0%) were 8 cm and above. The median number of cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy was 4 (range; 1-6). The 4-year DFS rate was 50.2%. In patients with primary tumors smaller and larger than 8cm, the 4-year DFS rates were 66.1% and 22.2%, respectively. The 4-year DFS rates for patients with 4 or less and more than 4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy were 27.1% and 69.2%, respectively. The 4-year OS rate was 78.5% in patients with primary tumors smaller than 8 cm and 18.8% in patients with tumors larger than 8 cm. The 4-year OS rate was 24.3% in patients who received 4 or less adjuvant cycles and 79.5% in patients who received more than 4 cycles. We have demonstrated that the number of adjuvant therapy courses above 4 and the presence of primary tumors smaller than 8 cm are influential over overall and disease-free survival in the patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. The number of postoperative adjuvant treatment cycles should be forced as much as possible in these patients who haven’t had neoadjuvant therapy.Publication Metadata only External validation of a novel risk model in patients with favorable risk renal cell carcinoma defined by international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database consortium (imdc): results from the turkish oncology group kidney cancer consortium (tkcc) database(2022-01-01) ARIKAN, RUKİYE; Yekedüz E., Karakaya S., Ertürk İ., Tural D., Uçar G., Şentürk Öztaş N., ARIKAN R., Hızal M., Küçükarda A., Sever Ö. N. , et al.© 2022Background: A novel prognostic model was recommended for patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) by the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC). In this study, we aimed to externally validate a novel risk model for the IMDC-favorable risk group in patients with mRCC. Methods: The Turkish Oncology Group Kidney Cancer Consortium (TKCC) is a multicenter registry that includes 13 cancer centers in Turkey. As described by Schmidt et al., 3 parameters (ie, time from diagnosis to systemic therapy 80, and the presence of brain, liver, or bone metastasis) were used to divide the IMDC favorable risk group into 2 new categories: very favorable and favorable risk groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Time to treatment failure (TTF) and objective response rate (ORR) in the very favorable and favorable risk groups were the secondary endpoints. Results: A total of 545 patients with mRCC from all IMDC risk groups and 112 patients from the favorable risk group were included in this study. According to the novel classification model, 44 (39.3%) and 68 (60.7%) patients with former favorable risk were categorized into very favorable and favorable risk groups, respectively. The median OS (55.8 months vs. 34.2 months, P =.025) and TTF (25.5 months vs. 15.5 months, P =.010) were longer in the very favorable risk group than in the favorable risk group. The concordance index of the new IMDC model in all patients was 0.65 for OS. Despite the higher ORR in the very favorable risk group than in the favorable risk group, the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (52.4% vs. 44.7, P =.573). Conclusions: This was the first study to externally validate the novel IMDC risk model presented in the American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary Cancers Symposium 2021.