Browsing by Author "Tunbekici, Salih"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Efficacy and Safety of Doxorubicin-Ifosfamide Versus Gemcitabine-Docetaxel as First-Line Therapy in Advanced Nonuterine Leiomyosarcoma: A Multicenter Real-World Study
(Wiley, 2025) Tunbekici, Salih; Sahin, Gokhan; Yuksel, Haydar Cagatay; Acar, Caner; Akin, Imge; Aslanhan, Hasan; Gursoy, Pinar
Nonuterine leiomyosarcoma (NU-LMS) is a rare and biologically distinct subtype of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) with clinical behavior differing from that of uterine leiomyosarcoma. In advanced or metastatic STS, immunotherapy has demonstrated only modest activity, and chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment. However, there is a persistent unmet need for more effective and better-tolerated options in this population. This multicenter, retrospective study included 150 patients with histologically confirmed metastatic NU-LMS who received first-line doxorubicin-ifosfamide (AI) or gemcitabine-docetaxel (GD) at 26 oncology centers in Turkey between 2010 and 2024. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models. Of 150 patients, 79 received AI and 71 received GD. Median OS for the entire cohort was 21.0 months. Median OS was 22.0 months with AI and 19.1 months with GD (p = .18), median progression-free survival was 7.3 versus 6.1 months (p = .66), and overall response rate was 25.3% versus 29.6% (p = .58), indicating no statistically significant differences in efficacy between the two regimens. Hematologic toxicities were less frequent with GD. AI and GD demonstrated comparable efficacy as first-line regimens for advanced or metastatic NU-LMS, with fewer hematologic toxicities observed for GD. Tumor location may have prognostic implications. These findings support individualized treatment selection and highlight the need for prospective studies in this rare and understudied sarcoma subtype, while the recent LMS-04 trial underscores the importance of future comparisons with doxorubicin-trabectedin to further refine first-line strategies in LMS.
Real-World Comparison of Doxorubicin-Ifosfamide Versus Gemcitabine-Docetaxel Regimens in Metastatic Uterine Leiomyosarcoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
(Springer, 2025) Tunbekici, Salih; Sahin, Gokhan; Yuksel, Haydar Cagatay; Acar, Caner; Akin, Imge; Aslanhan, Hasan; Goker, Erdem
BackgroundUterine leiomyosarcoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with limited responsiveness to standard therapies. We conducted a real-world, multicenter study to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of two commonly used first-line chemotherapy regimens-doxorubicin-ifosfamide and gemcitabine-docetaxel-in patients with metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma.MethodsThis retrospective cohort included 271 patients with advanced or metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma treated between 2010 and 2023 across 30 centers in Turkey. Patients received either doxorubicin-ifosfamide (n = 142) or gemcitabine-docetaxel (n = 129) as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, and safety. Adverse events were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0, while survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and further analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsMedian overall survival was 19.7 months with doxorubicin-ifosfamide and 20.2 months with gemcitabine-docetaxel (P = .26). Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months with doxorubicin-ifosfamide and 7.0 months with gemcitabine-docetaxel (P = .62). The objective response rate was numerically higher with gemcitabine-docetaxel (35% vs. 26%), although not statistically significant (P = .11). Grade 3-4 neutropenia (16% vs. 12%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs. 6%) were more frequent with doxorubicin-ifosfamide.ConclusionsIn this largest-to-date real-world cohort of metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma, doxorubicin-ifosfamide and gemcitabine-docetaxel demonstrated comparable survival outcomes. Gemcitabine-docetaxel, however, was associated with a more favorable hematologic safety profile. These findings support the clinical utility of both regimens while underscoring the need for prospective, biomarker-driven studies to refine treatment selection and improve personalization in this rare malignancy.
Regorafenib Treatment for Recurrent Glioblastoma Beyond Bevacizumab-Based Therapy: a Large, Multicenter, Real-Life Study
(Mdpi, 2025) Tunbekici, Salih; Yuksel, Haydar cagatay; Acar, Caner; Sahin, Goekhan; Orman, Seval; Majidova, Nargiz; Gursoy, Pinar
Background/Objectives: In the REGOMA trial, regorafenib demonstrated an overall survival advantage over lomustine, and it has become a recommended treatment for recurrent glioblastoma in guidelines. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of regorafenib as a third-line treatment for patients with recurrent glioblastoma who progressed while taking bevacizumab-based therapy. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study in Turkey included 65 patients treated between 2021 and 2023 across 19 oncology centers. The main inclusion criteria were histologically confirmed isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wildtype glioblastoma, progression after second-line bevacizumab-based treatment, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of <= 2. Patients received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. Results: The median age of the patients was 53 years (18-67 years), with a median progression-free survival of 2.5 months (95% Confidence Interval: 2.23-2.75) and a median overall survival of 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.52-4.68). The median overall survival was improved in patients who received subsequent therapy after regorafenib treatment compared with those who did not (p = 0.022). Progression-free survival was longer in patients with ECOG 0-1 than in those with ECOG 2 (p = 0.042). The safety profile was consistent with that of the REGOMA trial, with no drug-related deaths observed. Conclusions: Regorafenib shows good efficacy and safety as a third-line treatment for recurrent glioblastoma after bevacizumab-based therapy. This study supports the use of regorafenib and emphasizes the need for further randomized studies to validate its role and optimize treatment strategies.