同步放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效及安全性

目的探讨同步放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的临床疗效及安全性。方法选取2011年1月至2014年1月间收治的90例局部晚期NSCLC患者,根据随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,每组45例。观察组患者接受同步放化疗,对照组患者接受序贯放化疗。比较两组治疗的近期临床疗效、1年生存率、不良反应以及生活质量评分。结果与对照组相比,观察组患者有效率、1年生存率均明显升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);不良反应发生率略有升高,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);生活质量各维度评分及总分均明显提高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论同步放化疗能够提高局部晚期NSCLC患者的临床疗效及生活质量,具有较高的安全性。     

同步放化疗与序贯放化疗治疗Ⅲ期不能手术非小细胞肺癌患者的疗效及不良反应

目的探讨同步放化疗与序贯放化疗治疗Ⅲ期不能手术非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的临床疗效和不良反应。方法选择2008年1月至2013年9月间收治的192例Ⅲ期不能手术的NSCLC患者。依据治疗方法,将患者分为同步放化疗组(同步组,144例)和序贯放化疗组(序贯组,48例)。其中,同步组又依据患者采用的放化疗方案分为同步1组(48例)、同步2组(48例)和同步3组(48例)。观察比较两组患者的临床疗效和不良反应。结果同步3组患者治疗总有效率为79.2%显著高于序贯组(66.7%,P<0.05);同步1组和同步2组患者4级放射性食管炎、放射性肺炎、骨髓抑制发生率均显著高于同步3组(P<0.05)。结论与序贯放化疗比较,同步放化疗结合适形放疗治疗Ⅲ期不能手术的NSCLC,更能有效地提高总有效率,同时降低不良反应发生率。     

局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同期放化疗和序贯放化疗的临床疗效比较

目的:比较局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同期与序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的疗效和不良反应。方法:58例Ⅲa期和Ⅲb期NSCLC患者随机分为两组。序贯组在化疗4个周期结束后行放疗。同期组于放疗开始第1,4,8,12周给予化疗。两组病例均采用三维立体适形放疗,GP方案(吉西他滨+顺铂)化疗。结果:同期组和序贯组的有效率分别为75.9%和48.3%,两组比较差异有显著性(P<0.05)。在疾病控制率方面,同期组为93.1%,序贯组为72.4%,两组比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。两组患者的血液学不良反应,同期组发生率为100.0%,序贯组为79.3%,两组间存在统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论:同期组的近期疗效较序贯组存在明显优势。     

局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同期放化疗和序贯放化疗的临床疗效比较

目的：比较局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同期与序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效和不良反应。方法：58例Ⅲa期和Ⅲb期NSCLC患者随机分为两组。序贯组在化疗4个周期结束后行放疗。同期组于放疗开始第1,4,8,12周给予化疗。两组病例均采用三维立体适形放疗,GP方案（吉西他滨＋顺铂）化疗。结果：同期组和序贯组的有效率分别为75.9%和48.3%,两组比较差异有显著性（P〈0.05）。在疾病控制率方面,同期组为93.1%,序贯组为72.4%,两组比较有显著性差异（P〈0.05）。两组患者的血液学不良反应,同期组发生率为100.0%,序贯组为79.3%,两组间存在统计学差异（P〈0.05）。结论：同期组的近期疗效较序贯组存在明显优势。     

紫杉醇脂质体诱导加同期放化疗与序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的随机对照研究

背景与目的序贯放化疗及同期放化疗在局部晚期肺癌治疗中得以广泛研究,而诱导加同期放化疗的研究尚少。紫杉醇脂质体副作用少,可使诱导加同期放化疗更顺利地实施。本文旨在比较紫杉醇脂质体加顺铂(TP方案)诱导加同期放化疗和序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small celllung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效及毒副作用。方法我院60例局部晚期NSCLC患者随机分为诱导加同期放化疗组(A组)和序贯放化疗组(B组)。A组:诱导化疗2个-3个周期后行同期放化疗,放疗的第1天及第22天予TP方案化疗(紫杉醇脂质体135mg/m2-175mg/m2,d1;顺铂70mg/m2-80mg/m2,d2),期间持续放疗。B组:化疗方案同前,化疗4个-6个周期后,行放疗。两组放疗方式均为三维适形放疗,总剂量为56Gy-70Gy。观察和比较两组的疗效和毒副作用。结果 A组、B组总有效率分别为80.3%和60%,组间有统计学差异(P=0.042);1年生存率分别为71.4%和53.2%,组间无统计学差异(P=0.18);骨髓抑制发生率分别为90%和73.3%,组间无统计学差异(P=0.09);放射性食管炎发生率分别为50%和36.7%,组间无统计学差异(P=0.147);肺纤维化发生率分别为30%和20%,组间无统计学差异(P=0.276)。结论在晚期NSCLC的局部治疗中,TP方案诱导加同期放化疗较序贯放化疗的近期疗效好,但毒副反应无明显区别。     

同步放化疗与序贯放化疗治疗67例局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效比较

[目的]探讨同步放化疗及序贯放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效及不良反应。[方法]67例局部晚期NSCLC患者分为同步放化疗组（35例）及序贯放化疗组（32例）。同步放化疗组采用紫杉醇40mg/m2,卡铂AUC=2,d1;3DCRT与化疗同时开始,每周1次。序贯放化疗组先行2个周期全身化疗：紫杉醇150mg/m2,卡铂AUC=6,d1,21d为1个周期;第42d开始行3DCRT。[结果]同步放化疗组及序贯放化疗组有效率分别为77%及56%,1年生存率分别为76%和66%,2年生存率分别为39%和32%,差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。两组不良反应差异无显著性（P〉0.05）。同步放化疗组、序贯放化疗组局部复发率分别为20%（7/35）和31%（10/32）,差异有统计学意义（χ2=4.521,P=0.033）。[结论]同步放化疗治疗局部晚期NSCLC疗效较好,但有增加不良反应的可能。     

局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同步放化疗并序贯化疗与单纯序贯放化疗的对比研究

目的 观察局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）接受调强放疗（IMRT）联合同步吉西他滨和卡铂方案（GC）化疗与序贯放化疗的近、远期疗效和不良反应。方法 回顾性分析不能进行手术治疗和拒绝手术治疗的局部晚期NSCLC患者65例,其中同步放化疗并序贯化疗组给予IMRT同步联合GC治疗者32例,单纯序贯放化疗组为33例给予IMRT后序贯GC治疗。通过统计分析比较两组之间的近期有效率、远期生存率和不良反应。结果 两组均完成治疗,随访率100%,同步放化疗并序贯化疗组近期有效率为75%,单纯序贯放化疗组为66.7% ,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。两组1、3年生存率相比较,同步放化疗并序贯化疗组为68. 2% 、20. 5% ;单纯序贯放化疗组为 50. 1% 、11.3%;同步放化疗并序贯化疗组明显优于单纯序贯放化疗组（P＜0.05）。两组不良反应情况对比,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 IMRT同步联合GC方案并序贯化疗治疗局部晚期NSCLC,可以提高患者的远期生存率且不良反应可耐受。     

同步放化疗与序贯放化疗对晚期食管癌的临床疗效分析

目的探讨同步放化疗和序贯放化疗对晚期食管癌患者生存期和并发症等临床疗效的差异。方法选取2013年4月至2015年4月间江苏省泰州巿第二人民医院收治的82例晚期食管癌患者,采用随机数表法分为同步放化疗组和序贯放化疗组,每组41例。观察并比较两组患者的生存期、生活质量、病灶缓解情况和不良反应情况。结果同步组1~2年生存率低于序贯组,>2年生存率大于序贯组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。两组患者<1年生存率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。序贯组患者中位生存期和进展期分别为17.3个月和12.5个月,同步组患者的中位生存期和进展期分别为22.3个月和14.2个月。同步组患者的吞咽哽咽感、呕血和胸骨后疼痛方面评分均高于序贯组患者,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。同步组客观缓解率(ORR)和疾病控制率(DCR)均大于序贯组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。两组患者在治疗期间均无IV度不良反应发生;序贯组0度和I度放射性食管炎、0度血液毒性及0度和I度胃肠道毒副作用发生例数多于同步组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论采用同步和序贯放化疗治疗晚期食管癌安全性良好,但同步放化疗在提高晚期食管癌患者生存期,改善生活质量和疾病疗效方面优于序贯放化疗。     

不能手术局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同步或序贯放化疗85例临床分析

目的：评价不能手术局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（ NSCLC）患者同步或序贯放化疗的疗效和不良反应。方法：2011年7月至2013年12月间初治接受同步或序贯放化疗的85例患者入组本研究,其中45例同步放化疗患者列入A组,40例序贯放化疗患者列入B组。A组采用放疗同步紫杉醇、顺铂化疗,B组采用单纯放疗,放疗结束后行紫杉醇、顺铂化疗。两组放疗方法相同,均为三维适型放疗,剂量60Gy/30f。对比两组治疗的疗效、不良反应和1、2年生存率。结果：85例患者均可评价疗效,随访率100%。A组与B组有效率分别为73.3%和50.0%（P﹤0.05）;1年局部控制率分别为51.1%和30.0%（P﹤0.05）;1年生存率分别为62.2%和42.5%（P﹥0.05）;2年生存率分别为37.8%和17.5%（P﹤0.05）。A组≥Ⅲ级放射性肺炎、放射性食管炎及Ⅲ~Ⅳ级骨髓抑制的发生率分别为6.7%、11.1%和28.9%,B组分别为5.0%、10.0%和27.5%。两组不良反应相似,均可耐受。结论：局部晚期NSCLC同步放化疗的疗效优于序贯放化疗,不良反应可耐受,同步放化疗是不能手术的局部晚期NSCLC标准治疗方法。     

局部晚期非小细胞肺癌同期放化疗加巩固化疗与序贯放化疗的疗效比较

目的探讨局部晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）同期放化疗加巩固化疗与序贯放化疗的近期和远期疗效及不良反应。方法选取2010年1月至2012年12月住院治疗的77例局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者,随机分为同期加巩固组（37例）和序贯组（40例）。同期加巩固组患者在第1周、第5周分别给予依托泊苷＋顺铂（EP方案）化疗,之后给予单药多西他赛巩固化疗2～4个周期。序贯组患者先行多西他赛＋顺铂（TP方案）化疗2～4个周期,再行放射治疗或先放射治疗后给予TP方案化疗2～4个周期。放射治疗为常规普通放疗（总剂量60～66Gy,分30～33次,5～6周完成）。结果两组患者有效率分别为83.8%和55.0%,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;两组患者的中位生存时间分别为18.0个月和15.0个月,1年生存率分别为75.4%和66.7%,2年生存率分别为49.2%和40.7%,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。不良反应主要为骨髓抑制、放射性食管炎、放射性肺炎及胃肠反应。同期加巩固组患者的不良反应发生率明显高于序贯组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论同期加巩固化疗相比于传统的序贯放化疗,可以提高局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者近期有效率,延长生存时间,但不良反应相应增加,尤其是骨髓抑制和放射性食管炎,临床应根据患者具体情况选择应用。     

介入化疗加栓塞术与新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗在宫颈癌根治性手术患者中的应用效果比较

目的 研究新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗对比介入化疗加栓塞术对行宫颈癌根治性手术患者的临床疗效.方法 选取确诊并接受治疗的宫颈癌患者50例,将采用新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗联合宫颈癌根治性手术治疗的25例患者作为对照组;将采用介入化疗加栓塞术联合宫颈癌根治性手术治疗的25例患者作为治疗组.对两组患者的临床治疗效果、术后的病理变化情况及不良反应发生情况进行比较.结果 治疗组的有效率为76.0％,高于对照组的44.0％(P﹤0.05);治疗组的淋巴结转移率为28.0％,低于对照组的52.0％(P﹤0.05);治疗组的呕吐、肝肾功能损害、骨髓抑制、脱发及色素沉着的发生率均低于对照组(P﹤0.05).结论 介入化疗加栓塞术比新辅助化疗全身静脉化疗在行宫颈癌根治性手术中取得了更好的临床治疗效果.     

The future of chemotherapy at home--from outpatient chemotherapy to chemotherapy at home

Chemotherapy for colorectal cancer has changed greatly. A continuous systemic chemotherapy like FOLFOX or FOLFIRI became a standard. It is necessary to get sufficient knowledge and technique of chemotherapy for an infusion port system and a portable pump system. The risk management aspect is very important. Both strict and steady drug mixing and an administration system are necessary. It is also important to make a 24-hour surveillance system for any unusual conditions. The hospital as a whole must come to grips with these problems. The chemotherapy at an outpatient clinic or home will become a standard in the near future because it preserves the patients' QOL.     

Rationalization of adjuvant chemotherapy by induction chemotherapy

An induction chemotherapy, before any local treatment, allows to precise the chemosensitivity of the primary tumor. These data may help to improve indication and type of a further adjuvant chemotherapy. However there are many biological differences between different sites of the same tumor and along the time, without or after treatment. It is thus impossible to be sure that a chemotherapeutic regimen effective as first treatment on the primary will be equally active on micro-metastases some months later. Many questions in this field will be answered only by controlled studies and careful observations.     

Achievements and future of chemotherapy

Although surgery and radiotherapy result in a cure in 40% of all cancer patients, the remaining 60% of the patients die as a result of metastatic disease. For those patients cancer has to be considered as a systemic disease and cure from cancer will likely come from some type of systemic treatment. This article gives a brief overview of the achievements in the development of chemotherapy over the last 50 years and the new potential targets for further drug development.     

Surgery and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as treatment of high-grade MALT gastric lymphoma

Background and Objectives Treatment of high-grade MALT (mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue) gastric lymphoma remains uncertain. To assess efficacy and toxicity of the most common therapies—surgery followed by chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone—we began a controlled clinical trial in patients in early stage (I and II). Methods One hundred and two patients were randomized to be treated with surgery followed by six cycles of CEOP-Bleo (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, vincristine, prednisone, and bleomycin at standard doses) (52 cases) or with chemotherapy alone (49 cases). Results Complete response rates were 94% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88–99%] and 96% (93–100%), respectively. Actuarial curves at 5 yr showed that event-free survival were 70% (95% CI: 59–74%) in patients treated with surgery and chemotherapy, that were not statistically significant to 67% (95% CI: 51–69%) in the patients who received chemotherapy (p=0.5). Also, overall survival that was not statistically significant: 78% (95% CI: 70–88%) in the combined treatment and 76% (95% CI: 70–87%) in chemotherapy (p=0.8). Acute and late toxicity were mild and well controlled. No acute leukemia or second neoplasm has been observed. Conclusions The use of surgery and chemotherapy did not improve outcome in patients with early-stage high-grade gastric MALT lymphoma. It is apparent that chemotherapy alone is sufficient treatment in this select group of patients.     

Thalidomide and chemotherapy combination

Angiogenesis has been shown to be important in tumor growth and metastasis. Thalidomide, an oral sedative, has recently been found to inhibit angiogenesis. We therefore set out to ask whether thalidomide can be used as therapy for breast cancer. In a mouse model of breast cancer, we found that thalidomide alone did not suppress tumor growth. However, mice treated with thalidomide in combination with cytoxan and adriamycin had significantly smaller tumors than those given the two chemotherapeutic agents alone (3,432 +/- 303 mm(3) versus 4,643 +/- 203 mm(3), p = 0.0005). We proceeded to administer thalidomide together with chemotherapy to seven breast cancer patients in the context of a Phase I trial. Side effects attributed to thalidomide were minimal, and included constipation and a rash. We concluded that an approach at cancer therapeutics combining an antiangiogenic agent such as thalidomide with conventional chemotherapy may be feasible and deserves further studies.     

遗传多态性与肿瘤化疗

遗传多态性是药物反应中个体差异的遗传基础,通过识别特定的多态基因型与药物疗效及毒性的关系,可为个体化治疗提供依据.现综述药物代谢酶、药物靶及药物运输因子等的遗传多态性与相关肿瘤化疗药物关系的研究进展.     

Same-day pegfilgrastim and chemotherapy

Pegylated filgrastim is a new formulation of a neutrophil colony-stimulating factor that has a long circulating half-life, permitting a single dose of filgrastim per cycle of chemotherapy. The pegylated filgrastim is recommended to be administered not less than 24 hours following chemotherapy and not less than 14 days prior to chemotherapy based on the theoretic concern that marrow suppression would be accentuated. This schedule of usage for pegylated filgrastim may compromise its application for weekly chemotherapy schedules. We have treated 80 patients with pegylated filgrastim administered on the same day as chemotherapy; the latter delivered on a weekly schedule. Twenty-four patients had non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and were treated with one of two weekly chemotherapy regimens alternating triplets [AT] taxane, cisplatin, irinotecan alternating with gemcitabine, cisplatin, vinorelbine or alternating doublets [AD] taxane, cisplatin alternating with gemcitabine, vinorelbine; four of these patients also received weekly taxane and carboplatin with concomitant thoracic radiation. A consistent pattern emerged in which leukocytosis was observed at Day 8; median WBC 15,800/uL (range 7,200 to 35,000/uL); at Day 14, the median WBC was 9,300/uL (range 1,100 to 17,400/uL). Pegylated filgrastim can be given safely simultaneously with chemotherapy in weekly chemotherapy schedules. The pegfilgrastim can be administered on an every two week (fortnightly) schedule to maintain a weekly chemotherapy schedule.