scholarly journals Survival Analysis and Prognostic Factors for Neuroendocrine Tumors in Turkey

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 6687-6692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Birsen Yucel ◽  
Nalan Akgul Babacan ◽  
Turgut Kacan ◽  
Ayfer Ay Eren ◽  
Mehmet Fuat Eren ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 107327482098682
Author(s):  
Min Shi ◽  
Biao Zhou

Background: The incidence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) has increased significantly. The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients under 50 years old. Methods: Patients with PNETs recorded in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2004 to 2015 were analyzed. The clinical characteristics were analyzed by Chi-square test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS). Multivariate Cox proportional risk regression analysis was used to determine independent prognostic factors. Results: 2,303 patients included, of which 547 (23.8%) patients were younger than 50 years old. The number of younger patients has increased steadily, while the proportion in total PNETs decreased recently. Compared with older group, the proportion of the Black, grade I/II, and surgery were higher in early-onset PNETs. Liver was the most frequent metastatic site. There was no significant difference in the incidence of different metastatic sites between younger and older PNETs patients, while younger patients had better OS (P < 0.05). Grade, N stage, M stage, and surgery were independent prognostic factors for OS in early-onset PNETs. Conclusions: Younger patients have unique clinicopathological characteristics compared with older patients in PNETs. Better OS was observed in younger patients which might due to the higher proportion of well-differentiated tumor and surgery than older patients.


2002 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Christina Lopes A. Oliveira ◽  
Francisco Jos� C. Reis ◽  
Eduardo A. Oliveira ◽  
Enrico A. Colosimo ◽  
Ana Paula A.F. Monteiro ◽  
...  

Surgery ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 159 (5) ◽  
pp. 1382-1389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier M. Keutgen ◽  
Naris Nilubol ◽  
Electron Kebebew

HPB ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S995
Author(s):  
F. Sánchez-Bueno ◽  
J.M. Rodriguez ◽  
J. De la Peña ◽  
E. Ortiz ◽  
M. Fuster ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruoyu Huang ◽  
Guanzhang Li ◽  
Yiming Li ◽  
Yinyan Wang ◽  
Pei Yang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There are limited studies on treatment strategies and associated clinical outcomes in patients with secondary glioblastoma (sGBM). We sought to investigate the prognostic factors and treatment decisions in a retrospective cohort of patients with sGBM. Methods One hundred and seventy-one patients with sGBM who met the screening criteria were included in this study. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox survival analysis were used to detect prognostic factors. R (v3.5.0) and SPSS software (v25.0, IBM) were used to perform statistical analyses. Results The median overall survival was 303 days (range 23–2237 days) and the median progression-free survival was 229 days (range 33–1964 days) in patients with sGBM. When assessing the relationship between adjuvant treatment outcome and extent of resection (EOR), the results showed that patients underwent gross total resection can benefit from postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, but not in patients underwent subtotal resection. In addition, we also found that aggressive adjuvant therapy can significantly improve clinical outcomes of IDH1-mutated patients but no significant prognostic value for IDH1-wildtyped patients. The univariate Cox regression analyses demonstrated that EOR, adjuvant therapy, and postoperative Karnofsky Performance Scores were prognostic factors for patients with sGBM, and multivariate COX analysis confirmed that adjuvant therapy and EOR were independent prognostic factors. Conclusions For patients with sGBM, aggressive postoperative adjuvant therapy after gross total resection was recommended. However, we did not detect a benefit in IDH1-wildtype patients in our cohort.


Pancreas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-513
Author(s):  
Prerna Khetan ◽  
Femi Oyewole ◽  
Edward Wolin ◽  
Michelle Kang Kim ◽  
Celia M. Divino

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 110-119
Author(s):  
Adeniyi Francis Fagbamigbe ◽  
Clearance Abel ◽  
Baitshephi Mashabe ◽  
Ayo Stephen Adebowale

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document