紫杉醇脂质体联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗卵巢癌的疗效比较

目的探讨和比较紫杉醇脂质体联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗卵巢癌的疗效。方法选取2012年5月至2015年5月间收治的60例卵巢癌患者,按照随机数字表法分为研究组和对照组,每组30例。研究组患者采用紫杉醇脂质体联合卡铂治疗,对照组患者采用紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗,比较两组的疗效及不良反应。结果研究组患者的总有效率为73.3%(22/30),对照组为70.0%(21/30),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。研究组患者的过敏反应、白细胞减少、血红蛋白减少、血小板减少、皮疹、肌痛、胃肠道反应发生率均显著低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),但两组患者的脱发发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论紫杉醇脂质体联合卡铂治疗卵巢癌与紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗卵巢癌疗效相当,但不良反应少。     

紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗卵巢癌的效果分析

目的探讨紫杉醇联合卡铂化疗治疗卵巢癌的效果。方法收集92例卵巢癌患者的临床资料,根据不同的治疗方法,将患者分为对照组与观察组,每组各46例。对照组患者单纯采取卡铂化疗,观察组患者采取紫杉醇联合卡铂化疗。分析2组患者临床疗效与不良反应发生率。结果观察组治疗总有效率为89.13%,对照组总有效率为63.04%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组不良反应发生率为26.09%,对照组为23.91%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期卵巢癌的临床效果明显优于单纯卡铂治疗,患者均可耐受出现的不良反应,值得临床推广。     

脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗老年晚期头颈部肿瘤的临床观察

目的探讨脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗老年晚期头颈部肿瘤的近期疗效及安全性。方法对22例老年晚期头颈部肿瘤进行化疗,方案为脂质体紫杉醇135 mg/m2,d1;卡铂300 mg/m2,d2,21~28天重复。2个周期后评价疗效及不良反应。结果 22例中21例可评价疗效,共完成周期数72个,完全缓解(CR)2例,部分缓解(PR)6例,稳定(SD)9例,进展(PD)4例,总有效率(CR+PR)38.1%,疾病控制率(CR+PR+SD)80.9%,主要不良反应为骨髓抑制、胃肠道反应、脱发、疲乏,其中Ⅲ~Ⅳ级不良反应为8例(38.1%),无化疗相关性死亡。结论脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗老年晚期头颈部肿瘤有较好的近期疗效,反应可耐受。     

脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗上皮性卵巢癌的疗效和安全性比较

目的 比较脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗上皮性卵巢的疗效和安全性。方法 198例术后完成不少于六周期化疗的上皮性卵巢癌患者随机分为试验组和对照组,分别给予脂质体紫杉醇（175 mg/m²）+卡铂AUC5方案（试验组）和紫杉醇注射液（175 mg/m2）+卡铂AUC5方案（对照组）,两组化疗周期均为21 d。从第2化疗周期开始比较两组患者的疗效和不良反应。结果 试验组和对照组的总有效率分别为50.50% vs. 53.60%,差异无统计学意义（P=0.738）。22例（11.11%）患者在化疗结束停药后出现复发,其中试验组6例（27.27%）,对照组16例（72.72%）,（P=0.029）。试验组患者的过敏反应、脱发、恶心呕吐、腹泻、白细胞减少、血小板减少、肝功能损害情况均明显低于对照组患者,两组间差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。而在其他不良反应方面两组比较差异无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。结论 脂质体紫杉醇联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合卡铂方案治疗上皮性卵巢癌的疗效相当,随访期复发率更低,同时过敏反应、骨髓抑制、胃肠道反应及肝功能损害方面的不良反应发生率明显低于紫杉醇联合卡铂方案。     

奥沙利铂联合替吉奥或紫杉醇脂质体化疗方案一线治疗晚期胃癌的疗效比较

目的探讨比较奥沙利铂联合替吉奥或紫杉醇脂质体化疗方案一线治疗晚期胃癌的疗效。方法选取2012年12月至2014年12月间广东省珠海市人民医院收治的96例晚期胃癌患者,均无法接受手术治疗,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组48例。观察组患者采用奥沙利铂联合替吉奥化疗方案,对照组患者采用奥沙利铂联合紫杉醇脂质体化疗方案。比较两组患者的疗效和不良反应。结果观察组患者的有效率和疾病控制率分别为41.7%和72.9%,对照组则分别为45.8%和70.8%,组间差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。观察组患者疾病进展时间和生存时间分别为(5.3±0.6)个月和(12.3±0.8)个月,对照组则分别为(5.1±0.4)个月和(10.4±0.6)个月,组间疾病进展时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),生存时间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组患者关节肌肉疼痛和中性粒白细胞减少症发生率均低于对照组(均P<0.05)。结论奥沙利铂联合替吉奥治疗晚期胃癌患者,其生存情况和耐受性方面优于奥沙利铂联合紫杉醇脂质体方案,值得临床推广。     

紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床分析

目的探讨紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效。方法将2006年2月至2011年12月收治的110例晚期非小细胞肺癌患者随机分为两组,对照组给予顺铂单药化疗,治疗组采用紫杉醇联合卡铂化疗,比较两种治疗方案的临床总有效率及不良反应。结果治疗组临床总有效率为89.1%,对照组为74.5%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者的主要不良反应为恶心、呕吐、白细胞减少、血小板减少和血红蛋白减少,且两组患者Ⅰ~Ⅱ级发生率基本相当,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与单用顺铂相比,紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌临床疗效显著,且未明显增加不良反应,值得临床推广应用。     

多西紫杉醇联合卡铂与氟尿嘧啶联合卡铂治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌近期疗效的比较

背景与目的:以铂类为基础联合氟尿嘧啶(5-fluorouracil,5-FU)方案是鼻咽癌患者最常用方案,但患者的疗效一直维持在50%～60%。多西紫杉醇是治疗头颈部恶性肿瘤有效的单药,其给药方式简单、给药时间短。本研究通过比较多西紫杉醇联合卡铂(TC)方案与5-FU联合卡铂(FC)方案对局部晚期鼻咽癌患者的近期疗效和不良反应,探讨局部晚期鼻咽癌诱导化疗的新方案。方法:2005年11月1日至2008年12月1日,58例局部晚期鼻咽癌患者按照相同的临床分期和性别,随机抽签进入试验组和对照组。试验组29例患者采用多西紫杉醇联合卡铂诱导化疗2个疗程后,行2疗程卡铂单药同期放化疗;对照组29例患者采用5-FU代替多西紫杉醇诱导化疗,余治疗方案同试验组。χ2检验比较两组患者诱导化疗及同期放化疗的近期疗效和不良反应。结果:试验组的平均化疗周期数比对照组多(3.31vs.2.83,P=0.043)。两组近期疗效及1年总生存率差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。试验组和对照组Ⅲ度及Ⅲ度以上中性粒细胞减少的发生率分别为72.4%和37.9%,差异有统计学意义(P=0.05)。试验组血小板减少和呕吐发生率均较对照组少,差异有统计...     

紫杉醇和白蛋白结合型紫杉醇分别联合铂类药物治疗复发转移性头颈部鳞癌的疗效比较

目的 比较观察紫杉醇和白蛋白结合型紫杉醇分别联合铂类药物治疗复发转移性头颈部鳞癌的疗效和安全性。方法 回顾性分析2020年6月至2022年6月许昌市中心医院收治的120例复发转移性头颈部鳞癌患者,根据治疗方法分为2组,每组60例,对照组采用紫杉醇联合卡铂或顺铂,观察组采用白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合卡铂或顺铂,比较观察2组疾病控制率(DCR)、不良反应、生命质量测定(QLQ-C30)量表评分,随访6个月后统计生存时间和生存率。结果 观察组治疗4个周期后DCR高于对照组(χ²=4.022,P=0.045)。观察组Ⅰ、Ⅱ级不良反应总发生率低于对照组(χ²=4.444,P=0.035)。观察组治疗后2、4个周期后QLQ-C30量表评分均高于对照组(t=6.344,P<0.001;t=7.561,P<0.001)。观察组生存优于对照组(P=0.031)。结论 对复发转移性头颈部鳞癌患者实施白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合铂类药物治疗效果显著,安全性高,并可延长生存时间。     

双环铂联合紫杉醇与卡铂联合紫杉醇方案在初治晚期非小细胞肺癌的Ⅱ期临床研究

目的:评价双环铂联合紫杉醇与卡铂联合紫杉醇化疗方案在初治晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的疗效和毒性.方法:本研究为随机、对照、开放的Ⅱ期临床研究,符合条件的受试者随机分入试验组和对照组,试验组给予双环铂450mg/m2+紫杉醇175mg/m2,每3周一次;时照组给予卡铂(AUC=5)+紫杉醇175mg/m2,每3周一次.按照RECIST标准进行疗效评价,观察记录不良反应,随访患者生存率.结果:中山大学肿瘤防治中心共入组合格受试者32例,中位随访时间:12.5月,随机分配入试验组和对照组各16例,两组受试者的分配在性另q、年龄、PS评分、分期和组织学分类是均衡的.两组受试者在试验组和对照组缓解率分别为31.2%和37.5%(P=1.000),总中位生存时间在试验组未观察到,对照组:10.7个月(P=0.295),1年生存率分别为54.8%和20.1%(P=0.028),两组主要的毒性反应均为骨髓抑制和消化道反应,对照组有较多的淋巴细胞减少,其他的不良反应和Ⅲ一Ⅳ度的不良反应两组受试者未观察到有统计学意义的差异.结论:双环铂联合紫杉醇的化疗方案和卡铂联合紫杉醇方案在初治晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效类似且安全有效,值得开展更大规模Ⅲ期临床研究进一步评价双环铂的疗效和毒性.     

白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合卡铂在晚期、复发性上皮卵巢癌治疗中的应用价值

目的观察白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期、复发性上皮卵巢癌的近期疗效和安全性。方法选取86例晚期、复发性上皮卵巢癌患者,随机分成2组。对照组采用溶剂型紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗,观察组采用白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗,21天为1个疗程,6个疗程后对治疗的有效性进行评价。结果观察组患者客观缓解率高于对照组(51.16%vs30.23%),差异存在统计学意义(P<0.05),观察组中位生存时间高于对照组(6.8月vs3.6月),死亡例数少于对照组(3例vs5例),差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。化疗后,观察组患者生活质量改善率优于对照组(60.47% vs 41.86%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论白蛋白结合型紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期、复发性上皮卵巢癌近期疗效较好,不良反应能耐受,值得临床上推广。     

紫杉醇联合卡铂与紫杉醇联合顺铂治疗晚期卵巢癌疗效比较

目的比较紫杉醇+卡铂与紫杉醇+顺铂治疗晚期卵巢癌的疗效和毒性.方法62例初治晚期卵巢癌患者随机分为紫杉醇+卡铂组(A组)30例和紫杉醇+顺铂组(B组)32例,化疗6～8周期后评价临床缓解率和药物毒性.结果A组有效率为73.3%,平均生存时间35个月;B组有效率71.9%,平均生存时间32个月,两组疗效和平均生存时间差异无显著性(P＞0.05).胃肠道反应、肾毒性和肌肉关节疼痛A组较B组轻(P＜0.05).结论紫杉醇+卡铂治疗晚期卵巢癌有效率不低于紫杉醇+顺铂,但毒性反应明显减轻,从临床的实用性和便利性考虑,更容易为临床医师和患者接受,特别适用于老年患者及对顺铂耐受性差的患者.     

Economic analysis of vinorelbine plus cisplatin versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: It is increasingly important to have timely information about the economic impact of new cancer therapies in today's cost-conscious environment. Nearly 170 000 people are diagnosed with lung cancer annually in the United States. We performed an economic analysis alongside Southwest Oncology Group Trial S9509 to estimate the cost-effectiveness of cisplatin plus vinorelbine versus carboplatin plus paclitaxel for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. There were no statistically significant differences in survival or cancer-related quality of life between the treatment arms. METHODS: Use of both protocol and nonprotocol lung cancer-related health care was tracked for 24 months from the initiation of therapy. To determine expenditures, nationally standardized costs were applied to each type of health care service used, and these were summed over time. Lifetime expenditures and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each arm of the trial were calculated with the use of a multivariate regression technique that accounts for censoring. Student's t tests were used to compare the difference in costs between the arms. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Cancer-related health care costs over the period of observation averaged 40,292 dollars (95% CI = 36,226 dollars to 44,359 dollars) for patients in the cisplatin plus vinorelbine arm versus 48,940 dollars (95% CI = 44,674 dollars to 53,208 dollars) for patients in the carboplatin plus paclitaxel arm (P =.004), with a mean difference of 8648 dollars (95% CI = 2634 dollars to 14,662 dollars). Protocol chemotherapy drugs and medical procedures costs were statistically significantly higher in the paclitaxel arm (P =.0003 and P<.0001, respectively), whereas protocol chemotherapy delivery costs were statistically significantly higher in the vinorelbine arm (P<.0001). There was no difference between the arms in costs for blood products, supportive care medications, nonprotocol-related inpatient or outpatient care, and nonprotocol chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with carboplatin plus paclitaxel is substantially and statistically significantly more expensive than treatment with cisplatin plus vinorelbine. The majority of the cost difference is due to the additional cost of the protocol chemotherapy (approximately 12,000 dollars). Notable differences in costs of downstream health care were not apparent.     

两种方案治疗转移性乳腺癌的临床评价与药物经济学分析

  目的  从药物经济学角度对紫杉醇联合卡铂或表柔比星两种转移性乳腺癌化疗方案进行分析,为临床用药提供参考。  方法  采用成本-效果分析法对TP、TE(T:紫杉醇,P:卡铂,E:表柔比星)两种方案进行临床病例的回顾性分析比较。  结果  中位随访期为23.5(9~42)个月,TP、TE两组方案的有效率分别为78.33%和80.00%;1年、2年无进展生存率分别为43.6%和38.9%、10.8%和17.4%;1年、2年总生存率分别为80.3%和78.3%、53.2%和47.9%,两组之间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。成本-效果分析结果表明,两方案治疗成本分别为10 303.8元和13 853.3元,成本/效果比分别为131.54和173.17(P < 0.01)。化疗不良反应方面,TP组脱发发生率明显低于TE组(P < 0.01)。  结论  两方案近期与远期疗效相当,TP方案成本-效果高于TE方案,可作为晚期乳腺癌的优选方案之一。      

Carboplatin plus gemcitabine therapy versus carboplatin plus weekly paclitaxel therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

We compared two chemotherapy regimens for advanced non small-cell lung cancer. The CG regimen consisted of carboplatin (AUC 4 to 5) on day 1 plus gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)) on day 1 and 8, every three weeks, while the CP regimen was carboplatin (AUC 6) on day 1 plus paclitaxel (70 mg/m(2)) on day 1, 8 and 15, every four weeks. There was a total of 62 patients, 23 on the CG regimen and 39 on the CP regimen. In initial treatment, the response rate, time to progression and median survival time in the CG regimen and CP regimens were 40% vs 22%, 124 days vs 67 days, and 422 days vs 328 days, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the outcome. However, the toxicity profile was different in the two regimens. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were frequent in the CG regimen (61% vs 31%, p=0.02, 44% vs 3%, p=0.0002, respectively). Non hematological toxicity including grade 2 alopecia was less in the CG regimen (4% vs 36%, p=0.012). In choosing the chemotherapeutic regimen for non small cell cancer, it is important to consider the toxicity.     

Adjuvant chemotherapy of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in uterine corpus cancer--comparison with cisplatin, adriamycin plus cyclophosphamide

The therapeutic efficacy and adverse reactions were compared between 14 patients who received TJ therapy using paclitaxel (PTX) and carboplatin (CBDCA) and 39 who received CAP therapy using cyclophosphamide (CPA), doxorubicin (DXR) and cisplatin (CDDP) as postoperative chemotherapy for cancer of the uterine body. In TJ therapy, PTX (175 mg/m(2)) and CBDCA (AUC 5) were administered on Day 1 (every 3 weeks), while in CAP therapy, CPA (500 mg/m(2)), DXR (40 mg/m(2)) and CDDP (50 mg/m(2)) were administered on Day 1 (every 4 weeks). Grade 3 or more severe hematotoxicity included leukocytopenia (incidence in the TJ and CAP groups: 71.4% and 64.1%, respectively), neutropenia (100%, 87.1%), thrombocytopenia (0%, 12.8%), and anemia (0%, 20.5%). No significant differences were noted between the two groups. Grade 3 or severe non-hematologic toxicities included nausea (0%, 15.4%) and vomiting (0%, 12.8%) with significantly higher incidence in the CAP therapy group (p=0.0000736, p=0.000736), peripheral sensory disturbance (7.1%, 0%) and arthralgia (7.1%, 0%) with significantly higher incidence in the TJ therapy group (p=0.00129, p=0.00000538). The survival rate and disease-free survival rate showed no significant differences between the two groups. TJ therapy is thought to be as effective as CAP therapy, and can be safely conducted, although precautions are required regarding arthralgia and neuropathy.     

紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床观察

目的:评价紫杉醇联合卡铂化疗方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的近期疗效和不良反应.方法: 25例晚期非小细胞肺癌,应用紫杉醇150mg-175mg/m2、卡铂按浓度/时间曲线下面积(AUC)＝5给药联合化疗,每3周重复,进行3-4周期.结果: 全组CR 0例,PR 12例,SD 10例,PD 3例,总有效率48 %,不良反应主要为关节肌肉酸痛、骨髓抑制、轻度胃肠道反应、脱发.结论: 紫杉醇联合卡铂治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效较好,不良反应可耐受,有较好的临床应用价值.     

A phase II evaluation of weekly paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced urothelial cancer

This Phase II trial was designed to evaluate the overall objective response rate, complete response rate, efficacy, and safety of weekly paclitaxel (Taxol) and carboplatin (Paraplatin) in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. Thirty-three patients with measurable, unresectable, stage III-IV carcinoma of the urothelium were enrolled. Paclitaxel (135 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC=2) were given by intravenous (IV) infusion weekly x 6 followed by two weeks rest. Patients were premedicated with oral dexamethasone, diphenhydramine, and cimetadine (or equivalent). Patient characteristics included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 0 (36%), one (36%), two (28%); median age 70 years (37-83); 29 (88%) male, four (12%) female; 16 (48%) patients had prior chemotherapy [eight postoperative (adjuvant), five neoadjuvant, three for metastatic disease] and eight (24%) had prior radiation therapy. Eight patients (24%) achieved objective responses, three complete responses (CR) and five partial responses (PR); one patient was not evaluable (patient died prior to first dose). The median duration of response was 13 months (range, 2-29). Nine patients (27%) had stable disease (SD) and 15 patients (45%) had progressive disease (PD). Median time to progression was 3.6 months (range, < 1-29) and median survival was 10.3 months (range, < 1-33). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included: asthenia (46%), neutropenia (36%), leukopenia (15%), thromboembolism (12%), diarrhea (9%), nausea and vomiting (9%), hyperglycemia (7%), and neuropathy (6%). Two patients died of sepsis, one death was treatment-related. Weekly paclitaxel plus carboplatin shows promising activity; however in the current study, efficacy may have been limited by the toxicities associated with this dose-intensive regimen in an elderly, pretreated patient population with poor performance status. This regimen warrants further study, perhaps as a three out of four week regimen or at reduced doses.     

Bavituximab plus paclitaxel and carboplatin for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Objective

Bavituximab is a phosphatidylserine (PS)-targeting monoclonal antibody with immune-modulating and tumor-specific vascular targeting properties. Preclinical studies have shown activity against numerous solid tumors and at least an additive effect in combination with chemotherapy. This study evaluated bavituximab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Patients and methods

This phase II, open-label study (NCT00687817) was conducted in 49 patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC utilizing a Simon two-stage design. Patients were treated with up to six cycles of carboplatin area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m² every 21 days with weekly bavituximab 3 mg/kg followed by bavituximab monotherapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

Results

The primary efficacy endpoint of overall response rate (ORR) was 40.8% (complete response [CR] 2.0%, partial response [PR] was 38.8%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.0 and 12.4 months, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 40.8% of patients. The most common treatment-related AEs were anemia (10.2%), asthenia, vomiting, paresthesia, anorexia, and fatigue (6.1% each). One patient with a central, cavitating squamous tumor developed fatal hemoptysis and aspiration.

Conclusion

Bavituximab in combination with paclitaxel–carboplatin as first-line therapy demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and potential efficacy in this single-arm phase II trial in patients with advanced local or metastatic NSCLC. Randomized trials with this regimen are in progress.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT00687817.