The Turkish version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire version 2.0 (EORTC QLQ-C30 v.2.0) has started to be used in clinical trials recently. The objective of the study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 v.2.0 and the correlation between the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) and the EORTC QLQ-C30. Two hundred and two lung cancer patients were included in the study between January and March 2000. All the subscales met the minimal standards of reliability (Cronbach's alpha > or = 0.70). Only the role functioning scale differed among the three disease stages of patients (local, locoregional and metastatic). There was no statistically significant difference among therapy types. All interscale correlations were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The strongest correlations were found among the physical functioning, role functioning and fatigue scales. Social functioning was closely related with physical, role, emotional and cognitive functioning. The weakest correlations were between nausea/vomiting and the other scales. Global quality of life (QOL) was substantially correlated with most of the scales except cognitive functioning. The coefficients for the correlation between the items differed between 0.12 and 0.97 and all the subscales were strongly correlated with the scales which they formed. The highest correlation between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and KPS was for physical functioning (r = 0.62, P< 0.05). The Turkish version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 is a valid (by means of interscales validity) and reliable instrument for Turkish lung cancer patients and can be used in clinical studies but needs supporting by the reference data on the QOL of the Turkish population.

Disease regression and pCR rate are increased with an interval between CRT and surgery exceeding 8 weeks. Registration number: NCT03287843 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

No abstract

No abstract

The most important prognostic factor for overall survival was the extent of resection. Further studies with larger numbers of patients are required to confirm the prognostic factors and to obtain a better understanding of the biological behavior of TETs.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of loading-dose intravenous (i.v.) ibandronate in women with breast cancer and bone metastases. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, phase II, open-label study, 13 women with breast cancer, bone metastases, and moderate/severe bone pain received ibandronate 6 mg/day (i.v. loading-dose 15 min infusion over 3 consecutive days) with follow-up until day 14. Endpoints included pain response (primary), duration until pain response, analgesic use, Karnofsky index, safety (including hematologic, biochemical, and urine examinations), and adverse events. Results: Pain intensity decreased on days 7 and 14 versus day 1 (mean visual analogue scale score: 3.2 ± 2.2 and 3.0 ± 2.1 versus 6.1 ± 0.9, respectively; p < 0.01 for both). Mean time to pain response was 8.2 ± 3.3 days. Mean rate of analgesic use decreased (69.2%, 16.7% and 15.4% on days 1, 7 and 14, respectively). Mean Karnofsky index score increased (80.8 ± 13.1 and 80.8 ± 13.2, on days 7 and 14 versus 77.7 ± 11.7 on day 1; p < 0.05 on both days). Conclusion: Bone pain and analgesic use decreased in women with breast cancer and bone metastases following loadingdose i.v. ibandronate which was well-tolerated with no renal safety concerns.