Ahmet Özveren

Dr. Ahmet Özveren

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2018 in Nutrition
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DBDerya Hopancı Bıçaklı
Derya Hopancı Bıçaklı
AÖAhmet Özveren
Ahmet Özveren
RURuchan Uslu
Ruchan Uslu
RDReci Meseri Dalak
Reci Meseri Dalak
RCRuksan Cehreli
Ruksan Cehreli
FAFehmi Akcicek
Fehmi Akcicek

30 April 2015 in Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BKBurçak Şaziye Karaca
Burçak Şaziye Karaca
MDMustafa Degirmenci
Mustafa Degirmenci
AÖAhmet Özveren
Ahmet Özveren
HAHarika Atmaca
Harika Atmaca
EBEmir Bozkurt
Emir Bozkurt
RURuchan Uslu
Ruchan Uslu

12 May 2023 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AÖAhmet Özveren
Ahmet Özveren
AEATIKE PINAR ERDOGAN
ATIKE PINAR ERDOGAN
FEFerhat Ekinci
Ferhat Ekinci
Clinical studies aimed at identifying effective and simple prognostic markers for gastric cancer are still being carried out. Inflammatory prognostic index (IPI) is being recognized as a promising prognostic marker in patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. To evaluate the prognostic utility of IPI in stage 4 gastric cancer. A total of 152 patients with stage 4 gastric cancer, whose laboratory parameters, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) data could be accessed, were evaluated. Kaplan Meier analysis was used for survival analyses. Hazard ratios were expressed with 95% CI values. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Study was approved by the Manisa Celal Bayar University’s Non-Invasive Clinical Research Ethics Committee (approval No. E-85252386-050.04.04-49119, date: 22.03.2021). We confirm that all methods were performed in accordance with relevant named guidelines and regulations. Median age at diagnosis was 63 years (range: 32–88). The number of patients who received first-line chemotherapy was 129 (84.9%). Median PFS with first-line treatment was 5.3 months, while it was 3.3 months with second-line treatment. Median OS was 9.4 months. Median IPI score was 22.2. We evaluated IPI score for its value in detecting survival status with ROC analysis and identified an IPI cut-off score of 14.6. Low IPI score was significantly associated with longer PFS and OS compared to high IPI (PFS in high vs. low IPI, 3.6 vs. 7 months; p < 0.001) (OS in high vs. low IPI, 6.6 vs. 14.2 months; p < 0.001). IPI score can be an independent prognostic index that is inexpensive, easy to access and evaluate for patients with metastatic gastric cancer, and may be useful in predicting survival in daily practice.

1 January 2019 in Indian Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ZSZeki Gokhan Surmeli
Zeki Gokhan Surmeli
AÖAhmet Özveren
Ahmet Özveren
CACagatay Arslan
Cagatay Arslan
MDMustafa Degirmenci
Mustafa Degirmenci
BKBurcak Karaca
Burcak Karaca
RURuchan Uslu
Ruchan Uslu
Background and Aim: The combination of cetuximab with platinum and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with metastatic or recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Biweekly (once in 2 weeks) administration of cetuximab requires fewer hospital visits and decreases treatment costs; therefore, it is more convenient both for the patients and for the healthcare providers. Here, we assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of an alternative biweekly regimen of cetuximab in combination with platinum and 5-FU chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for these patients. Methods and Materials: Medical records of patients with metastatic or recurrent non-nasopharyngeal SCCHN who were treated with a biweekly regimen of cetuximab (500 mg/m2 on day 1), cisplatin (40 mg/m2 on day 1) or carboplatin (target area under the curve 3.5 mg/ml × min on day 1), folinic acid (400 mg/m2 on day 1), and 5-FU (400 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 followed by continuous infusion of 2,400 mg/m2 5-FU over 46 h) were retrospectively reviewed. Survival estimates were calculated with the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: In total, 60 patients were included. The median age of the patients was 60.5. The objective response rate was 53.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 40.7–65.9). The median progression-free survival duration was 6.8 months (95% CI = 5.5–8.1) and the median overall survival duration was 13.3 months (95% CI = 8.4–18.2). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (28.3%) and leucopenia (13.3%). Grade 3 or 4 rash was observed in 3.3% of the patients. Conclusion: Biweekly administration of cetuximab, cisplatin, and 5-FU is an effective regimen with a favorable toxicity profile for the first-line treatment of metastatic or recurrent SCCHN. These results warrant further evaluation of this regimen in prospective trials.

17 November 2025 in Discover Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
STSalih Tunbekici
Salih Tunbekici
GŞGökhan Şahin
Gökhan Şahin
HYHaydar Çağatay Yüksel
Haydar Çağatay Yüksel
CACaner Acar
Caner Acar
IAImge Akın
Imge Akın
EGERDEM GOKER
ERDEM GOKER
Background Uterine leiomyosarcoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with limited responsiveness to standard therapies. We conducted a real-world, multicenter study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of two commonly used first-line chemotherapy regimens—doxorubicin–ifosfamide and gemcitabine–docetaxel—in patients with metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma. Methods This retrospective cohort included 271 patients with advanced or metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma treated between 2010 and 2023 across 30 centers in Turkey. Patients received either doxorubicin–ifosfamide (n = 142) or gemcitabine–docetaxel (n = 129) as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, and safety. Adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0, while survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and further analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models. Results Median overall survival was 19.7 months with doxorubicin–ifosfamide and 20.2 months with gemcitabine–docetaxel (P = .26). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months with doxorubicin–ifosfamide and 7.0 months with gemcitabine–docetaxel (P = .62). The objective response rate was numerically higher with gemcitabine–docetaxel (35% vs. 26%), although not statistically significant (P = .11). Grade 3–4 neutropenia (16% vs. 12%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs. 6%) were more frequent with doxorubicin–ifosfamide. Conclusions In this largest-to-date real-world cohort of metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma, doxorubicin–ifosfamide and gemcitabine–docetaxel demonstrated comparable survival outcomes. Gemcitabine–docetaxel, however, was associated with a more favorable hematologic safety profile. These findings support the clinical utility of both regimens while underscoring the need for prospective, biomarker-driven studies to refine treatment selection and improve personalization in this rare malignancy.

1 January 2012 in Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AÖAhmet Özveren
Ahmet Özveren
BABaris Akinci
Baris Akinci
OMOzer Makay
Ozer Makay
BSBanu Sarsik
Banu Sarsik
ISIlgin Yildirim Simsir
Ilgin Yildirim Simsir
MAMahir Akyildiz
Mahir Akyildiz
Although rare, symptomatic hypocalcemia may develop after the administration of phospho-soda. We herein present the case of a patient with phospho-soda-induced hypocalcemia who was surprisingly diagnosed with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) caused by a heterozygous mutation in the MEN1 gene (c628_631delACAG), thus resulting in a frameshift mutation (210ThrfsX224). In addition to being the first report of phospho-soda-induced hypocalcemia in a patient with MEN1-associated primary hyperparathyroidism, our report highlights the complex nature of calcium balance in the human body and helps clinicians to appreciate how confounding factors might affect the presentation of endocrine disorders.