Background: Mesenteric panniculitis is a chronic inflammatory process seen in mesenteric tissue. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence, clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings, and malignancy in patients diagnosed with mesenteric panniculitis using computed tomography. Methods: A total of 716 patients with mesenteric panniculitis were retrospectively evaluated by screening all computed tomography scans performed between January 2005 and December 2018. Results: Among 65 278 patients undergoing CT, 716 were diagnosed with mesenteric panniculitis. The prevalence of mesenteric panniculitis was 1.1%. The mean age was 56 ± 14 (20-91) years. The malignant and nonmalignant groups comprised 354 (49.4%) and 362 (50.6%) patients, respectively. The mean age of the malignant group was significantly higher than the nonmalignant group (P < .001). The most common malignancy was breast cancer (12.2%). A history of abdominal surgery was present in 179 (25%) patients with mesenteric panniculitis and it is higher in the malignant group than the nonmalignant group (128 [36.1%], 51 [14%], respectively, P < .001). Mean hemoglobin level and leukocyte count were lower in the malignant group than in the nonmalignant group (P < .001, P < .001, respectively). The mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate was higher in the malignant group than in the nonmalignant group (P = .030). Radiological criterion 2 was less common and radiological criterion 5 was more common in the malignant group than the nonmalignant group (91.0%, 96.4%, P = .004; 35.9%, 27.1%, respectively, P = .011). Conclusions: It is recommended to conduct research for malignancy in patients with mesenteric panniculitis, especially in the presence of clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings with high-risk features. Cite this article as: Atacan H, Erkut M, Değirmenci F, Akkaya S, Fidan S, Coşar AM. A single tertiary center 14-year experience with mesenteric panniculitis in Turkey: A retrospective study of 716 patients. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2023;34(2):140-147.

Objective: Extragonadal germ cell tumours have a more unfavourable prognosis than gonadal germ cell tumours. We aimed to evaluate the survival analysis, response rates, and factors affecting responses to high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with relapsed/refractory extragonadal germ cell tumours. Methods: This study included patients diagnosed with extragonadal germ cell tumours who underwent HDCT + ASCT between November 2016 and January 2023 at Gülhane Training and Research Hospital. Clinical characteristics and follow-up data from patient records and the hospital’s electronic system were retrospectively analysed. Patients under 18 years of age and those without medical records were excluded. Patient characteristics, post-HDCT progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) data, and factors affecting survival were examined. The relationship between clinical factors and OS/PFS was analysed. Results: Twenty-five patients were included in this study. Complete response (CR) was observed in seven patients (28%), partial response (PR) was observed in nine patients (36%), stable disease (SD) was observed in one patient, and progressive disease (PD) was observed in eight patients (32%) after HDCT + ASCT. The median follow-up period was 25.4 months. The median PFS and OS after HDCT + ASCT were calculated as 6.1 months and 12.2 months, respectively. Conclusions: Salvage HDCT + ASCT is an option in the treatment of extragonadal germ cell tumours, offering the potential for prolonged survival and curing.

Background/Aims: The treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which accounts for 90% of all liver cancers, is highly varied. The use of second-line treatments following progression on first-line atezolizumab and bevacizumab (Atez/Bev) for advanced HCC remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the real-world clinical results of second-line treatments in progression after Atez/Bev and to determine the factors affecting prognosis. Materials and Methods: Fifty-eight patients treated with second-line sorafenib, regorafenib, and cabozantinib for progression after first-line Atez/Bev for advanced/metastatic HCC from 20 centers in Türkiye between October 2020 and June 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Responses were evaluated by Response criteria, specifically Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) criteria. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were computed with the Kaplan–Meier method. The Cox regression model was utilized to analyze multivariate analyses. Results: About 82.8% of the patients were male and the median age of the whole group was 62 (range, 18-78) years. All patients progressed after first-line Atez/Bev and were given second-line treatment. The most commonly used second-line treatment option was sorafenib (70.7%), followed by regorafenib (12.1%) and cabozantinib (10.3%). Both median PFS (4.1 months) and median OS (7.8 months) were longer in patients treated with sorafenib compared to other treatments. In univariate analyses, Child–Pugh score B, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels (>200 ng/mL), extrahepatic spread, and Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) < 47.6 substantially raised the risk of overall mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that extrahepatic spread (HR (Hazard ratio): 0.41, P = .012), PNI level (HR: 0.24, P =.005), and AFP level (HR:1.97, P = .049) were independent predictors of OS. Conclusion: Although second-line therapies after Atez/Bev show different degrees of efficacy, survival rates are consistent with the literature. Extrahepatic spread, AFP level, and PNI level are the main prognostic factors. In light of this information, personalized treatment strategies may improve outcomes for this challenging patient group. Cite this article as: Majidova N, Yaslıkaya S, Mıldanoglu MM, et al. Efficacy of second-line treatments after atezolizumab and bevacizumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and related prognostic factors: A multicenter study by the turkish oncology group (TOG). Turk J Gastroenterol. 2025;36(5):293-301.

Background: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard treatment for relapsed or high-risk lymphoma. While disease-related factors are well-known, the impact of host-related factors like nutritional status remains less defined. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and other factors in lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study including adult patients with Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma who underwent ASCT between January 2015 and December 2023. Pre-transplant clinical, laboratory, and transplant-related variables were analyzed. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) was calculated using serum albumin and absolute lymphocyte count and dichotomized according to the cohort median. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analyses. We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study including adult patients with Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma who underwent ASCT between January 2015 and December 2023. Results: A total of 43 patients were included. Median age was 38 years, and 72.1% were male. Patients transplanted in complete remission (CR) had significantly longer PFS compared with those transplanted in partial remission (PR) (log-rank p = 0.022). Patients with higher pre-ASCT PNI demonstrated significantly improved PFS (median 45 vs. 7 months; log-rank p = 0.021). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, both higher PNI (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.16–0.97; p = 0.043) and complete remission prior to ASCT (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.17–0.98; p = 0.046) remained independently associated with improved PFS. Higher infused CD34⁺ (hematopoietic stem cell) dose was associated with shorter hospitalization but showed no statistically significant association with engraftment kinetics or survival. No variable was independently associated with OS, likely due to the limited number of death events. Conclusions: Pre-transplant prognostic nutritional index and disease response independently predict progression-free survival after ASCT in lymphoma. These findings highlight the complementary role of host-related and disease-related factors in transplant outcomes and suggest that PNI may serve as a practical tool for pre-transplant risk stratification and patient optimization. Given the small sample size and limited number of events, these findings should be interpreted with caution.

Background: Accurate prognostic assessment remains crucial in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), especially as treatment options have expanded beyond vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)–targeted therapies to include immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and ICI–TKI combinations. The widely used IMDC classification shows important limitations in the modern therapeutic era, highlighting the need for complementary prognostic tools. In this context, the Meet-URO and CANLPH scores—incorporating clinical, inflammatory, and nutritional markers have emerged as promising alternatives. Objective: To evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of the Meet-URO and CANLPH scoring systems in a real-world mRCC cohort predominantly treated with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy due to limited access to ICI-based combinations. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 112 patients with mRCC. The Meet-URO score was calculated for all patients, while the CANLPH score was assessed in 56 patients with complete laboratory data. CAR, NLR, and PHR were computed using baseline pre-treatment measurements. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) the latter defined exclusively for first-line therapy—were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Correlations between inflammatory markers and survival outcomes were analyzed using Spearman’s rho. Results: Meet-URO demonstrated clear prognostic stratification across all five categories, with the most favorable outcomes in score group 2 and progressively poorer OS and PFS in higher-risk groups. CANLPH also showed meaningful survival discrimination, with the highest inflammatory group (score 3) exhibiting markedly reduced OS and PFS. CAR was the strongest individual predictor of survival, while NLR and PHR showed weaker associations. Conclusion: Both Meet-URO and CANLPH provide strong, complementary prognostic information in mRCC, even in a cohort largely treated with TKI monotherapy. Their integration into routine risk assessment may enhance clinical decision-making, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Background/Objectives : Accurate prognostic assessment remains crucial in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), especially as treatment options have expanded beyond vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapies to include immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and ICI–TKI combinations. The widely used IMDC classification shows important limitations in the modern therapeutic era, highlighting the need for complementary prognostic tools. In this context, the Meet-URO and CANLPH scores—incorporating clinical, inflammatory, and nutritional markers—have emerged as promising alternatives. To evaluate and compare the prognostic performance of the Meet-URO and CANLPH scoring systems in a real-world mRCC cohort predominantly treated with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy due to limited access to ICI-based combinations. Methods: This retrospective single-center study included 112 patients with mRCC. The Meet-URO score was calculated for all patients, while the CANLPH score was assessed in 56 patients with complete laboratory data. CAR, NLR, and PHR were computed using baseline pre-treatment measurements. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), the latter defined exclusively for first-line therapy, were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Correlations between inflammatory markers and survival outcomes were analyzed using Spearman’s rho. Results: Meet-URO demonstrated clear prognostic stratification across all five categories, with the most favorable outcomes in score group 2 and progressively poorer OS and PFS in higher-risk groups. CANLPH also showed meaningful survival discrimination, with the highest inflammatory group (score 3) exhibiting markedly reduced OS and PFS. CAR was the strongest individual predictor of survival, while NLR and PHR showed weaker associations. Conclusions: Both Meet-URO and CANLPH provide strong, complementary prognostic information in mRCC, even in a cohort largely treated with TKI monotherapy. Their integration into routine risk assessment may enhance clinical decision-making, particularly in resource-limited settings.