GP方案和MVP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效观察

[目的]比较GP方案与MVP方案治疗非小细胞肺癌的疗效和毒性反应。[方法]75例非小细胞肺癌中,4 2例应用吉西他滨1.0g/m2 第1、8天静脉滴注,顺铂2 5mg/m2 第1～3天静脉滴注;33例应用丝裂霉素8mg/m2 第1天静脉推注,长春花碱酰胺3mg/m2 静脉滴注,顺铂2 5mg/m2 第1～3天静脉滴注;同时给予水化,利尿等处理,2 1d为1个周期,两个周期后评价疗效。[结果]GP组CR 4例、PR 2 0例,RR 5 7.1% (2 4 / 4 2 ) ;MVP组CR1例、PR11例,RR 36 .4 % (12 / 33)。两者统计学分析差异有显著性(P <0 .0 5 )。骨髓抑制为吉西他滨和长春花碱酰胺的主要毒性反应,其中GP组血小板数下降高于MVP组(40 .5 %比2 7.3% ) ;MVP组白细胞数下降高于GP组(72 .7%比5 0 .0 % ) ,但差异无显著性(P >0 .0 5 )。GP方案比MVP方案治疗非小细胞肺癌,疗效显著,毒性可耐受。

Comparison between GP and MVP regimen for adanced Non-small cell lung cancer

Objective To compare the efficacy and toxicity between GP (Gemcitabine Cisplatin) regimen and MVP (Mitomycin Vindesine Cisplatin) regimen in the treatment of advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer. [Methods] Seventy-five cases of NSCLC were enrolled .Among them,42 cases were treated with GP regimen. (GEM 1.0 g/m 2 ivgtt d1,8, DDP 25 mg/m 2 ivgtt d 1-3). Of 33 cases were treated with MVP regimen (MMC 8 mg/m 2 iv di,VDS 3 mg/m 2 ivgtt di,8 DDP 25 mg/m 2 ivgtt d 1-3).The patients in two groups were repeatedly treated every 3 weeks and evaluated the efficacy after 2 cycles. [Results] For the cases with GP regimen ,the overall response rate was 57.1% with complete response 4 cases and partial response 20 cases. For the cases with MVP regimen the overall response rate was 36.4% with complete response 1 case and with partial response 11 cases . There was significant difference between two groups (P<0.05) . Major toxicity is myelosuppression. The thrombocytopenia for GP regimen is higher than MVP regimen (40.5% versus 27.3%). The leucocytopenia for MVP regimen is higher than GP regimen (72.7% versus 50.0 %) (P>0.05). [Conclusion] GP than MVP regimen for advanced NSCLC shows a good curative effect and low toxicity. It deserves further clinical application.