重组人血管内皮抑素联合NP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌二例

目的 观察重组人血管内皮抑素(恩度)与NP方案联合治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的临床疗效与毒副反应.方法 2例NSCLC均采用NP方案化疗联合重组人血管内皮抑素治疗,第1例:长春瑞滨40 mg静脉推注,第1、8天;顺铂40 mg静脉滴注,第2天至第4天,21 d重复.第2例:长春瑞滨40 mg静脉推注,第1、8天;奈达铂60 mg静脉滴注,第2天至第3天,21 d重复.共用2个周期.2例均于化疗第二天配合重组人血管内皮抑素治疗,重组人血管内皮抑素15 mg+生理盐水250 ml静脉滴注3～4 h,1次/d,连用14 d,休息1周后重复.结果 2例均获得CR(完全缓解),毒副反应主要是消化道反应和骨髓抑制.结论 重组人血管内皮抑素与NP方案联合治疗晚期NSCLC,能够提高客观疗效,改善患者的生活质量,并延长患者的生存时间.     

DP与GP方案治疗国人晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效meta分析

目的:比较DP与GP方案治疗国人晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效和不良反应。方法:计算机检索pubmed、EMBASE、维普数据库、中国期刊全文数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、万方数据库等中外文数据库,检索时间至2011年4月30日;同时辅助其它检索,纳入DP与GP方案治疗国人晚期NSCLC的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trials,RCTs),根据Cochrane Handbook 5.0质量评价标准评价,用RevMan 5.0软件进行统计分析。结果:共纳入7篇RCTs(685名研究对象),meta分析结果显示:DP方案与GP方案治疗有效率(OR=1.00,95%CI:0.74-1.35,P=0.99)、1年生存率(OR=1.00,95%CI:0.74-1.37,P=0.99)和III-IV度白细胞减少率(OR=1.44,95%CI:1.00-2.08,P=0.05)无明显差异,但DP方案III-IV度血小板减少率(OR=0.21,95%CI:0.13-0.35,P<0.00001)明显低于GP方案。结论:对于国人晚期NSCLC患者,DP方案与GP方案疗效和1年生存率相当,GP方案III-IV度血小板减少发生率高于DP方案,化疗中要密切监测患者的血小板变化。     

双药方案对比单药方案治疗老年晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

背景与目的双药方案治疗老年晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效是否优于单药化疗尚存争议,本研究旨在对双药方案治疗老年晚期NSCLC患者的有效性和安全性进行系统评价。方法计算机检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、中国期刊全文数据库和中国生物医学文献等数据库,收集双药方案治疗老年晚期NSCLC的随机对照试验,用Stata11.0软件对数据进行meta分析。结果共纳入12项随机对照试验(2,306例病例),meta分析结果显示与单药化疗相比双药化疗明显提高了老年晚期NSCLC患者的有效率(OR=1.80,95%CI:1.50-2.17,P<0.000,1)和1年生存率(OR=1.45,95%CI:1.22-1.72,P<0.000,1);含铂双药(OR=1.55,95%CI:1.18-2.03,P=0.001)和非铂双药组(OR=1.38,95%CI:1.10-1.73,P=0.006)的1年生存率均明显高于单药组;含铂双药组更易发生3/4级贫血、中性粒细胞减少、血小板减少和神经毒性(P<0.05),非铂双药组毒副反应发生率与单药组相似。结论与单药组相比,双药组可明显提高化疗有效率和生存率,更适合作为老年晚期NSCLC一线化疗方案,但尚需开展针对老年患者的随机对照试验加以验证。     

培美曲塞联合铂类对比吉西他滨联合铂类治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的meta分析

背景与目的培美曲塞联合铂类方案(PP方案)作为晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)一线化疗方案的疗效是否优于吉西他滨联合铂类方案(GP方案),目前尚无定论。本研究旨在评价采用PP方案与GP方案治疗晚期NSCLC的疗效及安全性。方法计算机检索Pubmed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、中国期刊全文数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、中文科技期刊全文数据库等,同时追查纳入文献的参考文献,纳入PP方案对比GP方案治疗晚期NSCLC的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trial,RCT)。根据Cochrane Handbook5.0的质量评价标准,用RevMan5.0软件进行统计学分析。结果共纳入4项RCT,2,235例患者,meta分析结果显示采用PP方案与GP方案治疗后在1年生存率(OR=1.09,95%CI:0.91-1.29)、有效率(OR=1.00,95%CI:0.40-2.52)等方面的差异无统计学意义,而在总生存时间(MD=0.26,95%CI:0.21-0.30)、脱发(OR=0.51,95%CI:0.39-0.66)及血液毒性等方面的差异有统计学意义。结论 PP方案与GP方案在1年生存率、有效率方面疗效相当,在总生存时间、不良反应等方面有差异,PP方案可能对不耐受血液毒性、脱发等患者更适合。     

重组人血管内皮抑素联合顺铂治疗恶性胸腔积液的Meta分析

目的 系统评价重组人血管内皮抑素(Endostar)联合顺铂与单药顺铂胸腔内注射治疗恶性胸腔积液(MPE)的疗效及安全性.方法 搜索Pubmed、Embase、CBM、CNKI、万方及维普数据库系统,检索关于重组人血管内皮抑素联合顺铂与单药顺铂治疗MPE的随机对照试验(RCT).应用STATA 12.0软件对数据进行Meta分析.结果 总共纳入17篇RCT,总计1105例患者.Meta分析结果显示:重组人血管内皮抑素联合顺铂(联合组)的胸腔积液缓解率高于单药顺铂(观察组)(RR=1.623,95%CI=1.472~1.789;Z=9.71,P=0.000),联合组的KPS评分改善率高于观察组(RR=1.592,95%CI=1.422~1.782;Z=8.09,P=0.000).在消化道不良反应方面,联合组发生率高于观察组(RR=1.204,95%CI=1.003~1.447;Z=1.99,P=0.047).而肝肾毒性、骨髓抑制、发热、疲乏等不良反应的发生率两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 现阶段研究结果证明,重组人血管内皮抑素联合顺铂治疗MPE的疗效优于单药顺铂,不良反应较轻,安全性好,期待纳入更多高质量研究进一步分析.     

榄香烯与含铂类化疗方案联合治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

目的:系统评价榄香烯与含铂类化疗方案联合治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的临床疗效及安全性。方法:以"榄香烯、肺癌、化疗及elemene、lung cancer、non-small cell lung canc-er,NSCLC"等为关键词,计算机检索如下数据库:中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普数据库(VIP)、万方数据库、The Cochrane Library、PubMed、Ovid、EMBASE及SCI,检索日期为数据库建立至2012年5月1日。纳入榄香烯乳与铂类联合化疗方案治疗晚期NSCLC的随机对照试验(RCT),两名评价者独立评价纳入研究的质量并提取资料,并用RevMan 5.0统计软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入9项研究,包括788例晚期NSCLC患者,所有研究均采用随机对照方法,但未详细报道是否采用分配隐藏或双盲。Meta分析结果显示,榄香烯+含铂化疗方案治疗晚期NSCLC的疗效,与单纯使用含铂类化疗方案比较,差异具有统计学意义(RR合并=1.55,P<0.01,95%CI=1.33-1.81),同时并不增加药物不良反应。结论:在治疗晚期NSCLC方面,榄香烯与含铂类化疗方案联合优于单纯含铂类化疗方案。     

重组人血管内皮抑素治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌Ⅲ期临床研究

[目的]观察重组人血管内皮抑素YH-16联合NP方案(去甲长春花碱+顺铂)治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的临床疗效,评价YH-16注射液临床应用的安全性和耐受性。[方法]2003年4月至2004年6月,对51例晚期NSCLC病人进行随机、双盲、对照的临床研究,分别以NP+YH-16(实验组)和NP+安慰剂(对照组)方案化疗2个周期。[结果]实验组的有效率为46.67%,受益率83.33%;对照组有效率35.29%,受益率88.24%,中位肿瘤进展时间:实验组为6.40月,对照组3.95月。二组间差异无显著性(P>0.05)。共发生不良事件3例,均为实验组。[结论]血管内皮抑素(YH-16)与NP方案联合可能具有一定的协同作用,可延长患者的肿瘤进展时间,临床安全性较好,未增加NP方案的不良反应发生率。     

卡铂对比顺铂联合第三代化疗药一线治疗晚期NSCLC的Meta分析

背景与目的:卡铂与顺铂在治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效是否相同目前并没有明确的证据,本研究旨在探讨卡铂为基础联合第三代化疗药物与顺铂为基础联合第三代化疗药物的两药方案一线治疗晚期NSCLC的差异.方法:通过计算机检索Medline(1954-2010年5月)、Central(the cochrane central register of controlled trials)(2010 issue3)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)(1978-2010年5月)、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)(1979-2010年5月)、万方数据库(1950-2010年5月)等,收集国内外公开发表的关于卡铂对比顺铂联合第三代化疗药物的两药方案一线治疗晚期NSCLC的随机对照研究(RCT),应用统计软件Stata 11.0进行数据分析.研究人群为晚期NSCLC(ⅢB～Ⅳ期):干预措施为顺铂或卡铂联合第三代化疗药物(包括:紫杉醇、吉西他滨、多西他赛)一线治疗晚期NSCLC的两药方案;结局指标为死亡率、客观反心率和药物毒性,并分别以风险比(hazard ratio,HR)、优势比(odds ratio,OR)及各自的95%可信区间(95%CI)作为效应指标对结局进行比较.Galbraith或L'abbe作图法及Q统计量的I检验来检测各研究间的统计学异质性,双侧P<0.05为各研究间存在明显的异质性.采用Begg和Egger法对发表偏倚进行量化检测.结果:最终纳入分析的文章5篇,共2 330例患者,其中卡铂组1 161例,顺铂组1 169例.接受卡铂为基础化疗方案的患者较顺铂为基础化疗的患者在治疗随访期间有更高的死亡风险,结果接近有统计学意义(HR=1.10,95%CI:1.00～1.21,Z=1.96,P=0.05);卡铂为基础化疗方案较顺铂为基础的化疗方案在客观反应率方面不同,顺铂组优于卡铂组(OR=0.80,95%CI:0.66～0.95,Z=2.48,P=-0.013);卡铂为基础的化疗方案易出现血小板降低(OR=2.13,95%CI:1.56～2.92,Z=4.72,P=0.000),顺铂方案易出现化疗相关的恶心呕吐(OR=0.49,95%CI:0.38～0.62,Z=5.70,P=0.000)及肾毒性(OR=0.40,95%CI:0.17～0.97,Z=2.03,P=0.042).结论:卡铂为基础联合第三代化疗药一线治疗晚期NSCLC的化疗方案在生存率及客观反应率方面并不优于顺铂为基础的化疗方案.卡铂为基础的化疗方案血液系统毒性发生率较高,而非血液系统毒性发生率较低.     

重组人血管内皮抑素联合化疗临床应用进展

重组人血管内皮抑素(恩度)自2006年SFDA批准上市以来,联合NP(长春瑞滨+顺铂)化疗方案用于治疗非小细胞肺癌患者,取得了较好的疗效,并写入NCCN指南(中国版)。随着其在其它恶性肿瘤方面的应用,其适应范围逐渐扩大,本文回顾了近年恩度与化疗方案联合应用的文献,就其最新进展进行综述。     

重组人血管内皮抑素联合常规化疗、体部立体定向放疗治疗局部晚期胰腺癌的临床观察

目的 观察重组人血管内皮抑素联合常规化疗、体部立体定向放疗治疗局部晚期胰腺癌的有效性和安全性.方法 64例不能手术切除的局部晚期胰腺癌患者接受体部立体定向放疗、吉西他滨+顺铂化疗、重组人血管内皮抑素靶向治疗.治疗后评价疗效和毒副反应.结果 治疗后3个月全组总有效率为73.4%(47/64),生活质量改善率达到78.1%(50/64).全组患者出现的Ⅲ~Ⅳ度毒副反应主要是白细胞减少(4.7%)、血小板减少(7.8%)及恶心呕吐(6.2%),主要与化疗有关.未出现治疗相关性死亡.结论 重组人血管内皮抑素联合吉西他滨+顺铂化疗、体部立体定向放疗治疗局部晚期胰腺癌患者近期疗效较好,毒副反应可耐受,且能提高患者的生存质量,是治疗局部晚期胰腺癌较好的方法.     

Endostar combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced NSCLCs: a meta-analysis

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of rh-endostatin (Endostar) combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we selected data from the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, SCI, CBM, CNKI, etc to obtain all clinical controlled trials, including the addition of endostar to chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients. The quality of included trials was evaluated by two reviewers independently. The software RevMan 5.0 was provided by Cochrane Collaboration and used for meta-analyses. Fifteen trials with 1335 patients were included according to the including criterion. All trials were randomized controlled trials, and two trials were adequate in reporting randomization. Thirteen trials didn't mention the blinding methods. Meta-analysis indicated that the NPE arm (Vinorelbine+ cisplatin+Endostar) had a different response rate compared with NP(Vinorelbine+ cisplatin) arm (OR2.16, 95%CI 1.57 to 2.99). The incidences of severe Leukopenia (OR0.94, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.32) and severe thrombocytopenia (OR 1.00, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.57) and Nausea and vomiting (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.61 to 1.20) were similar in the NPE arm compared with those in the NP arm. The NPE plus radiotherapy(RT) arm had a similar response rate compared with NP plus RT arm (OR 2.39, 95%CI 0.99 to 5.79). The incidences of Leukopenia (OR0.83, 95%CI 0.35 to 1.94) and thrombocytopenia (OR 0.78, 95%CI 0.19 to 3.16) and radiation esophagitis (OR 1.00, 95%CI 0.40 to 2.49)were similar in the NPE plus RT arm compared with those in the NP plus RT arm. Our results suggest that in the treatment of advanced NSCLCs, Endostar in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy can improve the response rate without obviously increasing side effects.     

Endostar combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced NSCLCs: a meta-analysis

Background: Use of recombinant human endostatin combined with conventional cytotoxic therapy to treat tumors has been growing because of evidence of increased efficacy. However, whether antiangiogenic therapy combined with chemotherapy really benefits patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) remains unclear. Objectives: This study was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of rh-endostatin (Endostar) combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of NSCLC patients. Methods: We selected data from the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, SCI,CBM, CNKI, to obtain all clinical controlled trials, including the addition of endostar to chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients. Twenty-two trials with 1884 patients were included according to the inclusion criteria. All were randomized controlled trials, and four trials were adequate in reporting randomization. Seventeen trials did not mention the blinding methods. Results: Meta-analysis indicated that the NPE arm (Vinorelbine+ cisplatin+Endostar) had a different response rate compared with NP(Vinorelbine+ cisplatin) arm (OR 2.22, 95%CI 1.62 to 3.03). The incidences of severe leukopenia (OR0.94, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.32) and severe thrombocytopenia (OR 1.00, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.57) and nausea and vomiting (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.61 to 1.20) were similar in the two arms. There were significant differences between the comparisons of TCE (Paclitaxel + carboplatin + Endostar) versus TC (OR 2.49, 95%CI 1.30 to 4.74) and GPE (Gemcitabine + cisplatin + Endostar) versus GP (OR 2.02, 95%CI 1.11 to 3.68 ) and TPE (Paclitaxel + cisplatin + Endostar) versus TP (OR 2.22, 95%CI 1.32 to 3.75 ). Conclusions: Our results suggested that in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, endostar in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy could improve the response rate without obviously increasing side effects.     

Chemo‐radiotherapy for advanced non‐small cell lung cancer: concurrent or sequential? It's no longer the question: a systematic review

There has been conflicting evidence concerning the best sequence of radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy (CT) for advanced non‐small‐cell‐lung‐cancer (NSCLC). To investigate whether current clinical trials can clarify this schedule and offer further bases for clinical decision making, we performed a systematic review of 11 trials (2,043 patients; concurrent–1,019, sequential–1,024) that compared concurrent RT‐CT with sequential arm in advanced NSCLC patients. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Pooled median ratios (MRs) and progression‐free‐survival ratios (FRs) for median survival and progression‐free survival (PFS) were calculated using the weighted sum of the log ratio of MR and FR of individual study. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for the objective response rate, relapse control rate, and toxic events were calculated using the Mantel‐Haenszel estimate. Results confirmed that concurrent RT‐CT determined a statistically significant increase in median survival time (16.3 vs. 13.9 months; MR = 1.17,95%CI:1.09–1.26), response rate (64.0% vs. 56.3%; OR = 1.38,95%CI:1.10–1.72), and tumor‐relapse control (OR = 0.82,95%CI:0.69–0.97), though at the expense of increased hematological toxicity (neutropenia and thrombocytopenia) and non‐hematological toxicity (nausea/vomiting, stomatitis, and esophagitis). Similar results were obtained from the sensitivity analysis of all Phase‐III/trials designed to evaluate the primary end point of OS. Subgroup analysis revealed that concurrent strategy was mainly associated with improved loco‐regional control (OR = 0.68,95%CI:0.52–0.87). However, no difference in PFS is shown. While careful interpretation of our conclusions is required because of potential bias, the present study, to some extent, exhibits the superiority of the concurrent arm over the sequential in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Further improvements will be obtained by optimizing the conditions for a concurrent regimen.     

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing carboplatin-based to cisplatin-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVE: Since the debate still exists whether cisplatin-based and carboplatin-based chemotherapy are equally effective for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a meta-analysis of trials was performed to compare the cisplatin-based with carboplatin-based regimens in first line chemotherapy of advanced NSCLC. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database, the Physician Data Query (PDQ) database and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting abstracts in January 2007. The following keywords were used: "non small cell lung cancer," or "Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung". Reference lists of original articles and review articles were also examined. The published languages and years were not limited. The trials searched were evaluated for eligibility and quality, and then the data were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (6906 patients) were identified from 4240 reports. The intention to treatment (ITT) analysis demonstrated that the cisplatin-based regimens had a higher overall response rate in comparison with carboplatin-based regimens (RR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.84-0.99; P=0.02). However, the 1-year survival rate for the two platinum-based regimens were comparable (RR, 1.00, 95%CI, 0.94-1.07; P=0.93), Both subgroup analysis comparing the doublet or triplet regimens of cisplatin or carboplatin in combination with new agents and the same agents had achieved the same results. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy led to more frequent grade 3 or 4 of nausea and vomiting, and nephrotoxicity (OR, 0.39; 95%CI, 0.30-0.52; P<0.00001 and OR, 0.31; 95%CI, 0.17-0.56; P=0.0001), while carboplatin-based chemotherapy inclined to developing more grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, however, there were no statistical significance (OR, 1.63; 95%CI, 0.94-2.82; P=0.08). The risk of grade 3 or 4 anemia, neutropenia and neurotoxicity was almost comparable between the two arms (OR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.59-1.02; P=0.07; OR, 1.08; 95%CI, 0.80-1.45; P=0.61 and OR, 1.59; 95%CI, 0.81-3.14; P=0.18, respectively). The subgroup analyses of the comparison between the doublet or triplet regimens of cisplatin and carboplatin in combination with the same agents, respectively, also achieved similar results, with the exception of thrombocytopenia between the two groups (OR, 1.94; 95%CI, 1.47-2.68; P<0.00001), which showed statistically significant. Cisplatin arm inclined to causing more treatment-related deaths compared as carboplatin arm, but there was no statistical significance (OR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.48-1.02; P=0.06). CONCLUSION: Given cisplatin-based regimens had a higher overall response rate as compared with carboplatin-based regimens, there was not a survival advantage in the cisplatin group. Therefore, the toxicity profile might play an important role in decision to choose cisplatin-based or carboplatin-based regimens.     

含顺铂的三组联合化疗方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照临床研究

背景与目的：长春瑞滨（vinorelbine,NVB）、紫杉醇（paclitaxel,TAX）和吉西他滨（gemcitabine,GEM）是目前治疗肺癌的一线药物,它们分别与顺铂（cisplatin,DDP）联合治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）疗效确切。但是关于三种联合化疗方案疗效及不良反应的比较,目前国内多为回顾性研究。本研究对这三组含DDP的联合化疗方案治疗晚期NSCLC的近期疗效及不良反应进行对比,为临床选择合适的化疗方案提供参考。方法：采用前瞻性开放性随机对照临床研究方法．对276例人组患者随机采用NP（NVB、DDP）、TP（TAX、DDP）或GP（GEM、DDP）方案化疗,化疗至少2周期后评价疗效及不良反应．进行组间比较。结果：NP组、TP组、GP组有效率分别是42.3％（41／97）、43．0％（40／93）和43.4％（36／83）;CR率分别为1．0％（1／97）,2．2％（1／93）和0（0／83）;中位生存期分别为8．5、8．8、9．2个月;无病生存期分别为4．1、3．8、3．9个月;1年生存率分别为31．9％、33．3％和31.3％;各组间差异均无显著性。主要不良反应是Ⅲ～Ⅳ度骨髓抑制、恶心呕吐、乏力和静脉炎。GP组的白细胞减少（42．2％）、中性粒细胞减少（36．2％）发生率最低,血小板减少发生率（53．0％）最高,与NP组（77．8％、67．7％、12．1％）、TP组（71．0％、57．0％、13．0％）比较差异均具有显著性（P〈0．01）;GP组、TP组的恶心呕吐发生率分别为16．8％、25．8％．均显著低于NP组（41．4％）（P=0．000,0．022）。GP组的乏力症状发生率（38．5％）、NP组的静脉炎发生率（58．6％）显著高于其他两组（P〈0．01）。结论：TP、NP和GP方案治疗晚期NSCLC近期疗效差异无显著性。NP方案不良反应较多,患者耐磴性相对较尊：TP、GP方案耐受性较好并各有优势。     

凡德他尼治疗非小细胞肺癌的meta分析

背景与目的凡德他尼是抑制血管内皮生长因子受体(vascular endothelial growth factor receptor,VEG-FR)和内皮生长因子受体(endothelial growth factor receptor,EGFR)的小分子药物,本研究旨在系统评价凡德他尼作为二线方案治疗非小细胞肺癌(non-smallcelllungcancer,NSCLC)的有效性和安全性。方法检索PubMed、Medline、Embase、维普、中国期刊全文数据库等数据库,收集凡德他尼治疗NSCLC的随机对照试验,用Revman 5.0软件对数据进行meta分析。结果与对照组(单用一种其它靶向药物或化疗药物)相比,凡德他尼组在疾病无进展生存期(OR=1.23,95%CI:1.05-1.45)、部分缓解(OR=2.15,95%CI:1.59-2.93)、疾病控制(OR=1.22,95%CI:1.06-1.40)、腹泻(OR=1.59,95%CI:1.38-1.83)、恶心(OR=0.69,95%CI:0.57-0.83)、皮疹(OR=2.07,95%CI:1.71-2.49)、便秘(OR=0.81,95%CI:0.67-0.97)、呕吐(OR=0.72,95%CI:0.60-0.87)等方面有统计学差异,但总生存期、疾病稳定、疲乏、咳嗽、食欲减退、呼吸困难等方面无统计学差异。结论凡德他尼作为二线方案治疗晚期NSCLC的疗效有一定的优势,但是其安全性无明显优势。     

射频消融联合放化疗治疗中晚期非小细胞肺癌的系统评价

目的:评价射频消融(radiofrequency ablation,RFA)治疗中晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）的有效性和安全性。本研究旨在评价射频消融联合化疗或放化疗治疗中晚期非小细胞肺癌的有效性和安全性,并为临床实践与深入研究提供参考。方法:计算机全面检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、EMBASE、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国学术期刊全文数据库、维普中文科技期刊数据库和万方数字化期刊全文数据库中有关射频消融联合化疗或放化疗治疗中晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照研究(randomized controlled trials,RCTs)和对照研究,时间截至2014年11月。由两位研究者逐篇评价纳入研究的质量、提取数据并交叉核对,采用 RevMan 5.2 软件进行数据处理。结果:共纳入16项研究,共980例病人。Meta分析结果显示:射频消融联合化疗的6个月及1、2、3年总体生存率均优于单纯化(OR=5.57,95%CI:2.90~10.70)、（OR=2.01,95%CI:1.41~2.86）、（OR=2.48,95%CI:1.51~4.07）、（OR=2.29,95%CI:1.24~4.22）,且差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,两组间并发症及不良反应发生率的差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;与放化疗相比,射频消融联合放化疗能提高患者的1年总体生存率（OR=2.09,95%CI:1.11~3.94）,并且能提高患者的KPS评分（OR=3.25,95%CI:1.60~6.61）,且差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论:与单纯化疗相比,射频消融联合化疗在提高中晚期非小细胞肺癌患者生存率上有明显优势,并且不增加并发症和不良反应;与放化疗相比,射频消融联合放化疗能提高患者的生存率和生存质量,且安全性较好。     

The value of combined-modality therapy in elderly patients with stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the value of combined-modality therapy in elderly patients by comparing the differences in outcome between patients who received radiotherapy (RT) alone and patients who received RT plus chemotherapy for stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: The North Central Cancer Treatment Group performed 2 recent Phase III trials for stage III NSCLC. The first trial, NCCTG 90-24-51, included 3 arms: once-daily RT (QDRT) alone, twice-daily RT (BIDRT) alone, and concurrent chemotherapy plus BIDRT. The second trial, NCCTG 94-24-52, included 2 arms and compared concurrent chemotherapy with either QDRT or BIDRT. The chemotherapy arms of both trials included etoposide and cisplatin administered concurrently with RT. Only the patients aged >/=65 years (elderly) who participated in those trials were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Of the 166 elderly patients who were included in this analysis, 37 patients received RT alone, and 129 patients received concurrent chemotherapy plus RT. The median and 5-year survival rates were 10.5 months and 5.4% for the RT alone group compared with 13.7 months and 14.7% for the RT plus chemotherapy group (log-rank P = .05). Patients who received RT plus chemotherapy experienced significantly greater severe toxicity (grade >/=3) compared with patients who received RT alone (89.9% vs 32.4%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients who participated in these trials appeared to gain a survival advantage from RT and chemotherapy compared with RT alone. As is the case with younger patients, this benefit came at the cost of additional toxicity.     

重组人血管内皮抑素联合NP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌中肿瘤空洞形成的意义

目的 分析晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)经重组人血管内皮抑素联合NP方案(长春瑞滨+顺铂)治疗后的肺部病灶内空洞形成现象,探讨其对抗血管生成治疗效果评价的意义.方法 57例晚期NSCLC患者,分别经重组人血管内皮抑素联合NP方案(29例)和NP方案(28例)治疗.治疗2个周期后行胸部CT检查,进行疗效评价;对治疗后出现肿瘤空洞的NSCLC进行临床及CT灌注成像分析;治疗前、后采用流式细胞术分别检测患者外周血活化循环血管内皮细胞(aCECs)数量.结果 NP方案组患者中见肺部病灶内空洞形成;重组人血管内皮抑素联合NP方案组患者中,5例(17.2%)肺部病灶内空洞形成,其中腺癌3例,腺鳞癌1例,肉瘤样癌1例,均未出现咯血症状.CT显示,5例均为周围型肺癌,单发空洞,形态以类圆形为主,平均直径为2.7 cm;3例薄壁,2例厚壁;4例位于瘤体中央,1例偏心.CT灌注功能成像显示,空洞形成患者的肿瘤内部供血处于抑制状态.5例空洞形成患者治疗前aCECs为323.2/105±236.9/105,治疗后下降至33.0/105±33.6/105.结论 肺部肿瘤出现空洞是抗血管生成治疗后一个较为独特的影像学表现.将其与CT灌注成像以及外周血aCECs联合观察,可能有助于评价抗血管生成治疗的疗效.