Evaluation of clinical and prognostic factors for primary gastric diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Single-center experience.

Objective: Primary gastric lymphomas, which make up the vast majority of extranodal non-Hodgkin lymphoma, are rare and the most common subtype is primary gastric diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (PG-DLBCL). In our study, we investigated the clinical and prognostic factors of this lymphoma type as a single-center experience. Materials and Methods: Between January 2001 and February 2021, 91 patients aged ≥18 years, registered with the diagnosis of primary gastric DLBCL, diagnosed histopathologically, and whose evaluation parameters were reached, were retrospectively scanned. Results: The median age of 91 patients with a diagnosis of PG-DLBCL was 58 (20-81, minimum-maximum) years. Of the patients, 64.8% were men and 35.2% were women. While the number of patients with an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score of 0-2 (low-low-intermediate risk) was 54 (59.4%), the number of patients with an IPI score of 3 (high intermediate) was 19 (20.9%), and the number of patients with an IPI score of 4-5 (high risk) was 18 (19.8%). While 52.7% of the patients had a complete response, 20.9% had a partial response, 3.3% had stable disease, and 23.1% had progressive disease. The 10-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for all patients, respectively, were 52.1% and 53.2%. We found factors affecting survival in univariate analysis; age groups (≤60/>60), ECOG groups (0-1/≥2), Lugano stage (I-II/III-IV), LDH level (normal/high), IPI risk groups (low/low-intermediate/high-intermediate/high) and radiotherapy (yes/no). In multivariate analysis, only; age groups (≤60/>60) and IPI risk groups (low/low-intermediate/high-intermediate/high) were found to be independent factors affecting survival. In addition, in our study, we determined that the division of the IPI intermediate risk group into low intermediate and high intermediate is one of the factors predicting prognosis. Conclusions: Few studies of PG-DLBCL have investigated the long-term survival rates of patients and primarily examined small patient groups because of the low incidence of the disease. In our study, we think that detailed evaluation of age and especially IPI risk groups play a role in predicting survival.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of 3 Months of CAPOX Followed by 3 Months of Capecitabine and 6 Months of CAPOX/FOLFOX in the Adjuvant Treatment of Low-Risk Stage III Colon Cancer Treated Surgically.

INTRODUCTION: In the adjuvant treatment of low-risk stage III colon cancer treated surgically, 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine is not a common clinical practice. Since there are no data on this practice in the literature, we have no idea how often it is used. However, it should be noted that this application is used in some centers due to the cumulative neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin but there are insufficient data in the literature on its efficacy. METHODS: The data of patients with colon cancer treated surgically who were followed up in 12 different oncology centers in Turkey between November 2004 and June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The study included 194 patients. The treatment arms were as follows: 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine = arm A and CAPOX/FOLFOX (6 months) = arm B. There were 78 patients (40.2%) in arm A and 116 patients (59.8%) in arm B. The median age and sex distribution were similar between the treatment arms. The median follow-up period of all patients was 34.4 months (95% confidence interval, 29.1-39.7). When arm A was compared with arm B, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 75.3% versus 88.4% and 5-year DFS was 75.3% versus 82.8%, respectively. There were similar DFS outcomes between the treatment arms (p = 0.09). Rates of any grade of neuropathy were numerically lower in arm A, but the difference between the treatment arms was not statistically significant (51.3% vs. 56.9%; p = 0.44). The frequency of neutropenia was similar between the treatment arms. CONCLUSION: In this study, the efficacy and safety of the 3 months of CAPOX followed by 3 months of capecitabine chemotherapy regimen in the adjuvant treatment of low-risk stage III colon cancer treated surgically were proven. This result may also support the discontinuation of oxaliplatin at 3 months while continuing fluoropyrimidines, which is a common clinical practice but lacks sufficient data.

The importance of serum and pleural fluid level of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF fluid/serum ratio in the differential diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma-related pleural effusion.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is one of the parameters that has been studied in differential diagnosis of malignant fluids. This study is aimed at evaluate applicability of serum, fluid VEGF level and fluid to serum VEGF ratio in the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The patients with pleural effusion over age of 18, between 2011 and 2015 were included in the study. They were divided into three groups: group 1 - mesothelioma patients; group 2 - other malignancies; and group 3 - benign aetiologies. Group 1 and 2 were termed as the malignant group. Fluid, serum VEGF levels, and the ratio of fluid/serum VEGF level were studied to evaluate the fluid/serum VEGF ratio in all groups. RESULTS: Twenty cases with mesothelioma, 44 cases with other malignancies, and 20 cases with benign aetiologies were included in this study. No statistically significant difference was found according to serum VEGF levels for all groups, (group 1: 437 ±324 pg/ml, group 2: 354 ±223 pg/ml, group 3: 373 ±217 pg/ml, p = 0.836), while fluid VEGF levels showed a statistically significant difference (group 1: 3359 ±700 pg/ml, group 2: 2175 ±435 pg/ml, group 3: 1092 ±435 pg/ml, p = 0.041). The ratio of fluid to serum VEGF levels showed a difference, at the significance limit, between the malignant (group 1 and group 2) and benign (group 3) groups (8.83 ±1.29 vs. 4.57 ±1.07, p = 0.059) but showed a statistically significant difference between the mesothelioma and benign groups (12.11 ±1.68 vs. 4.57 ±1.07, p = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: The VEGF fluid/serum ratio may be an applicable parameter in the differential diagnosis of malignant fluids, especially MPM.