Background/Aims: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are rarely seen and have heterogeneous clinical outcomes. Mostly half of the patients had metastatic disease at presentation. Palliative resection of primary site in metastatic disease is still controversial. The aim of this study was to find out the influence of resection of primary tumor site on progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic non-functioning gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The secondary end point is to determine the prognostic factors influencing the survivals. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted at a single medical oncology center, Antalya Education and Research Hospital. Patients who had non-functioning metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with primary site resected or unresected were compared retrospectively. Resection of metastases was excluded. Results: Fifty-three patients were included in the study and 29 patients had primary tumor resection. The primary site resected group had favorable outcomes with the overall survival (median unreached) compared to the median overall survival of 30 months in the unresected group (p=0.001). Median progression-free survival was also better in the primary site resected group than the unresected group (60 months vs. 14 months, respectively) (p=0.013). In multivariate analysis, unresected primary site and high-grade tumors were found to be independent prognostic factors on low survivals (Hazard ratio (HR): 4.6; 95% CI: 1.21-17.47 and HR: 10.1; 95% CI: 1.15-88.84, respectively). Age (p=0.131), gender (p=0.051), chromogranin A level (p=0.104), Ki-67 index (p=0.550), tumor size (p=0.623), and primary tumor area (p=0.154) did not influence the overall survival. Conclusion: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with primary site resected had improved survivals when compared to the unresected group.

Introduction and Aim: Cancer affects people psychologically and organically. The emotional state of cancer patients is fragile and can be affected by many factors. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mood and behavioral changes of cancer patients with solid cancer who are in follow-up and treatment. Material and Method: A face-to-face questionnaire was filled in solid cancer patients without known psychological disorders who applied to the Medical Oncology outpatient clinic between 1-30 September 2021. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the scale examining the perspectives on COVID-19 were applied to the patients whose consent was obtained. Results: A total of 235 people, participated in the survey. In the review of 202 completed surveys, 139 women and 63 men and the median age was 55 (23-83 years). In the study in which seventeen different solid cancer patients were evaluated, breast (52.5%), colon (19.3%) and lung (10.8%) cancers were most common. Most of the people who were more afraid of COVID-19 compared to cancer were patients who were on active cancer treatment. In the multivariate regression analysis, being on active treatment was found to be the only risk factor for 'being more afraid of COVID-19' compared to cancer. During COVID-19 pandemic, it was observed that 18 (8.9%) patients delayed their treatment/follow-up due to fear of COVID-19 infection. A high HADS anxiety score was observed in 58 (28.7%) patients, and a high HADS depression score was observed in 39 patients (19.3%). Conclusion: Cancer patients are seriously worried about the progression of their cancer due to changes in follow-up or treatment due to COVID-19 pandemic. However, despite the associated risks, they were found to want to continue their treatment as planned.

Pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is associated with favorable outco

Background and Objectives: Glioblastoma (GBM), defined as IDH-wildtype CNS WHO grade 4, remains the most common and aggressive primary malignant brain tumor in adults. Although the extent of resection (EOR), particularly gross total resection (GTR), is considered a potentially modifiable factor, survival comparisons across surgical groups are vulnerable to selection bias and unmeasured biological confounding. We evaluated the association between GTR and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed IDH-wildtype GBM in a dual-center, real-world cohort. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective, dual-center cohort study of 100 adult patients with histopathologically confirmed GBM who underwent primary surgical resection between 2015 and 2021. GTR was defined as no measurable residual contrast-enhancing tumor on early postoperative MRI (≤72 h). All patients received adjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the Stupp protocol. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier methods with log-rank tests and explored using univariable Cox regression analysis. Given the missing key prognostic covariates (notably MGMT promoter methylation) and the retrospective design, the analyses were reported as unadjusted and descriptive. Results: Of the 100 patients, 63 (63%) underwent GTR and 37 (37%) non-GTR. The GTR group had a significantly higher rate of radiologic complete response (42.9% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed in overall survival (OS; median 13 vs. 12 months, p = 0.847) or progression-free survival (PFS; 8 vs. 8 months, p = 0.963) between the groups in unadjusted analyses. Long-term Kaplan–Meier estimates (e.g., 5-year OS) should be interpreted cautiously due to the small number of patients at risk and potential selection and biological confounding. Conclusions: In this dual-center cohort, GTR was associated with improved radiologic response but not with longer OS or PFS in unadjusted analyses. These results should be considered hypothesis-generating and not interpreted as evidence against maximal safe resection. The absence of MGMT promoter methylation status, lack of volumetric EOR quantification (including non-contrast-enhancing/FLAIR disease), and lack of standardized functional outcome data substantially limited causal inference. Prospective studies integrating molecular stratification, volumetric resection metrics, and functional outcome assessments are warranted.

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal malignancy. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) enables molecular characterization and may identify clinically actionable alterations; however, real-world multicenter data linking genomic subgroups to survival outcomes remain limited. We aimed to characterize the molecular landscape of NGS-tested PDAC in a Turkish multicenter cohort and evaluate the association of key molecular alterations, including KRAS status and KRAS variant subgroups, with survival outcomes. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study including patients with pathologically diagnosed PDAC between 2017 and 2025 who underwent tumor-based NGS in routine clinical practice. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of metastasis, defined as the date of diagnosis for de novo metastatic disease and the date of first documented distant recurrence for recurrent cases. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from the initiation of first-line systemic therapy for metastatic disease to progression or death. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were constructed for OS and PFS using clinically relevant covariates selected a priori. Results: A total of 98 patients underwent molecular profiling, and survival analyses were performed in 92 patients with available OS/PFS data. KRAS mutations were detected in 83.7% (82/98) of patients, with predominant variants G12D (47.6%), G12V (30.5%), and G12R (12.2%). TP53 mutations were present in 59.2% (58/98) of tumors, and all tumors were microsatellite stable. Tumor mutational burden data were available for 72 patients; the median TMB was 3.83 mutations/Mb, and 15.3% of evaluable tumors had a TMB ≥ 10 mutations/Mb. Excluding KRAS, clinically actionable alterations were identified in 4.1% of patients, whereas an additional 32.7% harbored potentially actionable or investigational alterations. Median OS was 14.0 months (95% CI, 11.7–16.3), and median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI, 4.3–7.7). In unadjusted analyses, OS and PFS did not differ significantly according to KRAS mutation status (OS, p = 0.967; PFS, p = 0.652), TP53 mutation status (OS, p = 0.404; PFS, p = 0.510), or KRAS variant subgroup (OS, p = 0.332; PFS, p = 0.194). In multivariable Cox analyses, KRAS mutation status was not independently associated with OS (aHR 1.13, 95% CI 0.56–2.28; p = 0.727) or PFS (aHR 1.09, 95% CI 0.59–2.01; p = 0.780), whereas ECOG performance status remained the strongest adverse clinical factor. Conclusions: In this multicenter real-world PDAC cohort, the molecular landscape was dominated by KRAS and TP53 alterations, whereas clinically actionable non-KRAS alterations were identified in only a minority of patients. After adjustment for major clinical covariates, KRAS mutation status was not independently associated with OS or PFS. Molecular profiling may still be useful for identifying uncommon potentially targetable alterations; however, larger clinically annotated multicenter studies are needed to better define its prognostic and treatment-directing value in routine practice.