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: 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.