Purpose: To investigate the role of serum inflammatory cytokines and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in diabetic retinopathy (DR) and evaluate their relationship with macular thickness measurements obtained with optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods: The study enrolled 28 healthy subjects (Group 1), 31 patients without DR (Group 2), 49 patients with nonproliferative DR (Group 3), and 46 patients with proliferative DR (Group 4). Macular profile was assessed with Stratus OCT-3 and the serum concentrations of VEGF and interleukin-1 alpha (IL-1 alpha), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-10 (IL-10), macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP-1 alpha), monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP-1), and epidermal growth factor (EGF) were measured using multiplex bead immunoassay. Results: The median value of the visual acuity was 20/20 (Groups 1 and 2), and 20/100 (Group 3), and 20/125 (Group 4). The median value of central subfield macular thickness was estimated as 165.50 mu m in Group 1, 202.5 mu m in Group 2, 318 mu m in Group 3, and 310 mu m in Group 4. The median serum VEGF level, which was 98.20 pg/ml in Group 1, demonstrated a progressive rise to 125.37 pg/ml in Group 2, to 153.07 pg/ml in Group 3, and to 149.12 pg/ml in Group 4. Statistical significance was found between all groups (p0.05). The median serum levels of IL-8, IL-10, MIP-1 alpha, and EGF revealed a wide range within each group, however, no statistically significant relationship was found between the groups (p>0.05). The median values of the serum MCP-1 concentrations presented a statistically significant rise with the progression of DR (p=0.02). No correlation was found between macular thickness and serum cytokine and VEGF levels (p>0.05). Conclusions: Increased serum levels of VEGF and MCP-1 may act as a key regulator of DR and provide a potential tool for risk assessment in diabetic patients. Further studies that evaluate both vitreous and serum levels in various stages of DR are needed to provide a better understanding of the interaction between systemic and local inflammatory and angiogenic factors.

Background and Objectives: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) improves survival by increasing pathologic complete response (pCR). Blood-based indexes have been studied in breast cancer for predicting pCR and prognosis, but the results are conflicting. We aimed to assess the impact of inflammatory and nutritional indexes on pCR and survival. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 304 patients. Pre-NAC laboratory data were used to calculate their neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios (NLR), pan-immune inflammation values (PIV), lactate dehydrogenase–albumin ratios (LAR), and prognostic nutritional indexes. The optimal cut-off values were determined through an analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to reveal the factors predicting pCR. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were conducted to identify prognostic factors predicting survival. Results: The median follow-up was 38.5 months. pCR was achieved in 41.4% of the patients. In the univariate analyses, the NLR (p = 0.032) and PIV (p = 0.002) were indexes associated with pCR. In the multivariate analysis, the PIV (p = 0.008) was the only index significantly correlated with pCR. According to the multivariate Cox regression analyses, clinical stage 3 (p = 0.032), a pathologic response other than pCR (p = 0.021), and a high LAR (≥4.72) (p = 0.002) were correlated with increased recurrence risk. The univariate Cox regression analyses revealed that failure to achieve pCR (p = 0.037) and the presence of a high LAR (p = 0.044) were significant predictors of overall survival. However, the multivariate analyses failed to identify any significant predictors of death. Conclusions: We found that the PIV was more effective than the other indexes in predicting pCR. To our knowledge, this study is the first to determine an association between the LAR and disease-free survival in patients with breast cancer receiving NAC. We concluded that a high LAR was a poor prognostic factor, especially in patients without a pCR. Therefore, close postoperative monitoring and the intensification of adjuvant treatment should be considered for these patients. However, further studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Introduction: Approximately 20–33% of all cancer patients are treated with acid-reducing agents (ARAs), most commonly proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), to reduce gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Palbociclib and ribociclib are weak bases so their solubility depends on different pH. The solubility of palbociclib dramatically decreases to < 0.5 mg/ml when pH is above 4,5 but ribociclibs’ solubility decreases when pH increases above 6,5. In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent PPIs on palbociclib and ribociclib efficacy in terms of progression-free survival in metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients. Patients and methods: We enrolled hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative mBC patients treated with endocrine treatment (letrozole or fulvestrant) combined palbociclib or ribociclib alone or with PPI accompanying our observational study. During palbociclib/ribociclib therapy, patients should be treated with "concurrent PPIs" defined as all or more than half of treatment with palbociclib/ribociclib, If no PPI was applied, it was defined as ‘no concurrent PPI’, those who used PPI but less than half were excluded from the study. All data was collected from real-life retrospectively. Results: Our study included 217 patients, 105 of whom received palbociclib and 112 received ribociclib treatment. In the study population CDK inhibitor treatment was added to fulvestrant 102 patients ( 47%), to letrozole 115 patients (53%). In the Palbociclib arm fulvestrant/letrozole ratio was 53.3/46.7%, in the ribociclib arm it was 41.07/58.93%. Of 105 patients who received palbociclib, 65 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 40 were not. Of the 112 patients who received ribociclib, 61 were on concomitant PPI therapy, 51 were not. In the palbociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (13.04 months vs. unreachable, p < 0.001). It was determined that taking PPIs was an independent predictor of shortening PFS (p < 0.001) in the multivariate analysis, In the ribociclib group, the PFS of the patients using PPIs was shorter than the PFS of the patients not using (12.64 months vs. unreachable, p = 0.003). It was determined that taking PPIs was single statistically independent predictor of shortening PFS (p = 0.003, univariate analysis). Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that concomitant usage of PPIs was associated with shorter PFS in mBC treated with both ribociclib and especially palbociclib. If it needs to be used, PPI selection should be made carefully and low-strength PPI or other ARAs (eg H2 antagonists, antacids) should be preferred.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of bevacizumab and ranibizumab on visual function and macular thickness in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). The data of diabetic patients who had been treated with bevacizumab for DME were reviewed. Those patients who received 1 injection of intravitreal bevacizumab and ranibizumab with at least 6-month interval were considered for enrollment. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) assesment with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart and central subfield macular thickness (CSMT) measurement using optical coherence tomography-3 before and after the injections were recorded as outcome measures. The study included 29 eyes of 29 patients with a mean age of 56.18±13.07 years. The median BCVA was 59 ETDRS letters and the median CSMT was 411 μm preceeding the bevacizumab injection. At the 4th-6th week control after the injection, median BCVA increased to 61.50 ETDRS letters and the median CSMT decreased to 373 μm. This change in BCVA and CSMT was found to be statistically significant (P=0.029 and P=0.011, respectively). The mean interval between bevacizumab and ranibizumab treatment was 9.54±2.64 months. Ranibizumab treatment increased the median BCVA from 53 to 66 ETDRS letters and decreased the median CSMT from 428 μm to a level of 279 μm, which were statistically significant (P<0.001 and P<0.001, respectively). The median change in BCVA was 4.5 ETDRS letters in the bevacizumab group and 6 ETDRS letters in the ranibizumab group (P=0.58), whereas the median changes in CSMT were 41 and 100 μm after bevacizumab and ranibizumab injections, respectively (P=0.005). Bevacizumab and ranibizumab are both effective antivascular endothelial growth factor drugs preferred in the treatment of DME. Our comparison of both therapies on the same patients suggested that the effect on BCVA was not statistically different, but ranibizumab provided more decrease in CSMT.

To determine the ocular changes related to hypothyrodism in newly diagnosed patients without orbitopathy.