卡培他滨联合吉西他滨二线治疗晚期乳腺癌的临床观察

目的:观察卡培他滨联合吉西他滨二线治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药的晚期乳腺癌疗效与毒副反应。方法:蒽环类或紫杉类药物耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者30例,应用卡培他滨联合吉西他滨方案化疗:卡培他滨2 000 mg/(m2.d),d1～d14;吉西他滨1 000 mg/m2,d1、d8。21 d为1个周期,至少化疗2个周期。结果:30例患者中,CR 3例,PR 13例,SD 9例,PD 5例,有效率(ORR)53.3%,中位生存期(MST)14个月,1年生存率(OS)为56.7%;主要毒副反应为白细胞和血小板减少、胃肠道反应和手足综合征,均在可耐受范围内。结论:卡培他滨联合吉西他滨二线治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药的晚期乳腺癌有较好疗效,且毒副反应可以耐受。     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类与紫杉类耐药转移性乳腺癌的临床观察

为了探讨吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案治疗蒽环类与紫杉类药物耐药的晚期转移性乳腺癌的近期疗效及不良反应,选取37例耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者,接受吉西他滨1 000 mg/m2,静脉滴入,d1、d8;卡培他滨950 mg/m2,2次/d,口服,d1～d14.每3周重复.2个周期化疗后,总有效率(CR+PR)为29.7%(11/37),疾病控制率(CR+PR+SD)为70.3%(26/37).中位进展时间为6.9个月,中位生存时间为15.5个月.最常见的毒性为骨髓抑制、手足综合征及胃肠道反应.初步研究结果提示,吉西他滨联合卡培他滨是治疗蒽环类和紫杉类耐药的晚期乳腺癌的有效方法,不良反应可以耐受.     

吉西他滨联合国产卡培他滨治疗晚期三阴性乳腺癌的临床观察

目的 观察吉西他滨联合国产卡培他滨化疗方案治疗晚期三阴性乳腺癌的近期疗效和安全性.方法 采用吉西他滨联合国产卡培他滨化疗方案治疗21例既往曾接受过蒽环类、紫杉类化疗失败的晚期三阴性乳腺癌者,2周期化疗后评价近期疗效和不良反应.结果 21例患者中,CR 1例,PR 6例,SD 9例,PD 5例,有效率为33.3%.不良反应主要为Ⅰ、Ⅱ度血液学毒性、消化道反应和手足综合征等.结论 吉西他滨联合国产卡培他滨化疗方案治疗晚期三阴性乳腺癌安全有效,值得临床推广应用.     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗耐药性乳腺癌近期疗效观察

目的：对蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药性乳腺癌尚无标准解救方案.本研究探讨既往接受过蒽环类和或紫杉类药物治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌患者,使用吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案治疗的疗效和不良反应.方法：23例患者入选,均给予吉西他滨1000mg/m2,静脉滴注,第1、8天;卡培他滨2000mg/m2,分2次口服,第1-14天;每3周为1周期,至少应用2周期,评价临床疗效和不良反应,并进行随访.结果：23例患者中完全缓解1例,部分缓解11例,总有效率52.2%.主要不良反应为骨髓毒性及手足综合症,均较轻.结论：吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案治疗蒽环类和（或）紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌有较好的近期疗效,不良反应小,值得临床选择应用.     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类和紫杉类耐药的转移性乳腺癌

目的：观察吉西他滨（Gemcitabine）联合卡培他滨（Capecitabine）治疗蒽环类和紫杉类药物耐药的转移性乳腺癌患者的近期疗效和不良反应。方法：40例患者采用吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案化疗：吉西他滨1000mg/m2静脉滴注,第1、8天;卡培他滨1000mg/m2口服,每日两次,第1-14天;21天为1周期。每2周期评价疗效,每周期进行毒性和安全性评估。结果：40例患者共接受156周期化疗,中位化疗周期4个（2-6个周期）,总有效率（overall remission rate,RR）为35.00%（14/40）,其中临床完全缓解率（clinical completeremission,cCR）为7.50%（3/40）,部分缓解率（partial remission,PR）为27.50%（11/40）,稳定率（stable dis-ease,SD）为30.00%（12/40）,进展率（progressive disease,PD）为35.00%（14/40）。结论：吉西他滨联合卡培他滨是治疗蒽环类和紫杉类药物耐药的转移性乳腺癌的有效方案,其血液学和非血液学毒性耐受性良好。     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗耐药性乳腺癌近期疗效观察

目的:对蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药性乳腺癌尚无标准解救方案.本研究探讨既往接受过蒽环类和或紫杉类药物治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌患者,使用吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案治疗的疗效和不良反应.方法:23例患者入选,均给予吉西他滨1000mg/m2,静脉滴注,第1、8天;卡培他滨2000mg/m2,分2次口服,第1-14天;每3周为1周期,至少应用2周期,评价临床疗效和不良反应,并进行随访.结果:23例患者中完全缓解1例,部分缓解11例,总有效率52.2%.主要不良反应为骨髓毒性及手足综合症,均较轻.结论:吉西他滨联合卡培他滨方案治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌有较好的近期疗效,不良反应小,值得临床选择应用.     

吉西他滨联合顺铂二线治疗晚期乳腺癌的临床观察

目的 观察吉西他滨(GEM,健择)联合顺铂组成的GP方案二线治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药性晚期乳腺癌的疗效与安全性.方法 2004年-2007年以GP方案治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药性晚期乳腺癌29例,吉西他滨1 000 mg/m2静滴,第1、8天,顺铂25 mg/m2静滴,第1-3天,每21天为1周期.以WHO标准评价疗效和毒性.结果 29例患者,中位化疗周期数为3周期(2-4周期),其中CR 1例(3.4%),PR 14例(48.3%),SD 8例(27.6%),PD 6例(20.7%),有效率为51.7%.随访2年,中位TTP 35周(12-44周),中位生存期为62周(45～81周).主要毒性反应为恶心、呕吐与骨髓抑制.结论 吉西他滨和顺铂联合方案治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药性晚期乳腺癌疗效较好,毒性反应较轻,是二线治疗蒽环类或紫杉类耐药性晚期乳腺癌的安全有效的解救方案.     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗耐药转移性乳腺癌的临床观察

目的探讨吉西他滨和卡培他滨联合化疗治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药的转移性乳腺癌的近期疗效和不良反应。方法 2008年3月至2011年3月应用吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗转移性乳腺癌38例,每3周为1个周期,所有患者均评估毒性,对至少用过2个周期化疗的患者评估疗效。结果 CR 3例,PR 13例,SD 14例,PD 8例,有效率(CR+PR)为42.1%(16/38),临床获益率(CR+PR+SD)为78.9%(30/38)。主要不良反应为骨髓抑制、手足综合征、胃肠道反应。Ⅲ～Ⅳ度的骨髓抑制发生率低,手足综合征及消化道反应以Ⅰ～Ⅱ度为主。结论吉西他滨联合卡培他滨对蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药的转移性乳腺癌有较好的治疗效果,且不良反应可以耐受。     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类和紫杉类治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌的近期疗效观察

目的 评价吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类和紫杉类治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌的临床疗效和毒副反应.方法 将51例蒽环类和紫杉类治疗失败的女性晚期乳腺癌患者作为观察对象,给予吉西他滨1 000 mg/m2,静脉滴注,d1,8;卡培他滨1 500 mg/m2,2次/d,口服,d1～14;每3周为1疗程至少应用2个疗程,评价临床疗效和毒副反应.结果 51例均可评价疗效和毒副反应,CR 2例(3.92%),PR 19例(37.25%),SD 16例(31.37%),PD 14例(27.45%),总有效率(CR+PR)41.18%,临床获益率72.55%,中位无进展生存期9.0个月,中位生存期12.5个月;其中单纯淋巴结转移的有效率和临床获益率最高,而肝转移的有效率和临床获益率最低(P<0.05);Luminal A型和Luminal B型的有效率和临床获益率较好,明显优于Her-2+型和Basal-like型(P<0.05).主要毒副反应是骨髓抑制和手足综合征等,主要以Ⅰ～Ⅱ度为主,经对症处理后均能缓解.结论 吉西他滨联合卡培他滨化疗方案治疗蒽环类和紫杉类治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌有较好疗效,毒副反应可耐受.     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌的临床观察

目的 观察吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌的疗效和毒副反应.方法 30例对蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌入组,采用吉西他滨1000 mg/m2,静脉滴注,d1,8;卡培他滨950 mg/m2,口服,2次/d,d1～14;每3周为1周期,至少化疗2个周期.治疗结束后评价该方案的疗效和毒副反应.结果 CR 3例,PR 10例,总有效率为43.3%;中位疾病进展时间为9个月(2～29个月).主要毒副反应为骨髓抑制和手足综合征,均可耐受.结论 吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌疗效较好,毒副反应可耐受.     

NCb与NX方案治疗蒽环及紫杉类耐药的乳腺癌的临床研究

目的：观察长春瑞滨联合卡铂与长春瑞滨联合卡培他滨（Xeloda）对紫杉类及蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌的疗效及不良反应。方法：80例确诊为紫杉类、蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者随机分为A、B两组,各40例,A组：长春瑞滨25mg／m2,静滴,d1,8,卡培他滨1650mg／m2,口服,d1-14;B组：长春瑞滨25mg／m2,静滴,d1,5,卡铂350mg／m2,静滴,d1;3周1个周期,平均4周期,化疗结束2—3周后评价疗效。结果：78例患者可评价疗效,A组有效率37．5％,1年生存率42．5％,中位进展时间4．6个月;B组有效率42．1％,1年生存率45％,中位进展时间3．4个月,两组各指标差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。A组患者的手足综合症发生率明显高于B组（P〈0．05）;B组患者的呕吐、白细胞及血小板减少发生率明显高于A组（P〈0．05）,但Ⅲ-Ⅳ度呕吐、白细胞及血小板减少的发生率无明显升高（P〉0．05）。结论：对于紫杉类、蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者,长春瑞滨联合卡铂是一个安全、有效、经济的化疗方案。     

吉西他滨联合顺铂治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌的近期疗效观察

背景与目的:蒽环类和(或)紫杉类药物在新辅助和(或)辅助治疗中的广泛应用增加了乳腺癌复发转移后选择解救治疗药物的难度,有研究证明吉西他滨(gemcitabine,GEM)、顺铂(cisplatin,DDP)对乳腺癌明确有效。据此,本文旨在评估GEM联合DDP治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌的近期疗效。方法:收集2005年5月8日—2007年1月31日,采用GEM1000mg/m2(d1,d8)及DDP30mg/m2(d1～d3)3周方案治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者34例。中位化疗5个周期(2～6个周期),所有患者随访超过6个月。结果:完全缓解(CR)3例(8.8%),部分缓解(PR)13例(38.2%),稳定(SD)12例(35.3%),进展(PD)6例(17.7%);总有效率(CR PR)47.0%,中位疾病进展时间(TTP)6.5个月。不良反应Ⅲ/Ⅳ血小板减少或腹泻常见。结论:GEM联合DDP方案可用于蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌的解救治疗。     

NCb与NX方案治疗蒽环及紫杉类耐药的乳腺癌的临床研究

目的:观察长春瑞滨联合卡铂与长春瑞滨联合卡培他滨(Xeloda)对紫杉类及蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌的疗效及不良反应。方法:80例确诊为紫杉类、蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者随机分为A、B两组,各40例,A组:长春瑞滨25mg/m2,静滴,d1、8,卡培他滨1650mg/m2,口服,d1-14;B组:长春瑞滨25mg/m2,静滴,d1、5,卡铂350mg/m2,静滴,d1;3周1个周期,平均4周期,化疗结束2-3周后评价疗效。结果:78例患者可评价疗效,A组有效率37.5%,1年生存率42.5%,中位进展时间4.6个月;B组有效率42.1%,1年生存率45%,中位进展时间3.4个月,两组各指标差异无显著性(P>0.05)。A组患者的手足综合症发生率明显高于B组(P<0.05);B组患者的呕吐、白细胞及血小板减少发生率明显高于A组(P<0.05),但Ⅲ-Ⅳ度呕吐、白细胞及血小板减少的发生率无明显升高(P>0.05)。结论:对于紫杉类、蒽环类耐药的晚期乳腺癌患者,长春瑞滨联合卡铂是一个安全、有效、经济的化疗方案。     

Capecitabine and mitomycin C is an effective combination for anthracycline- and taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer

Capecitabine is converted to 5-fluorouracil by thymidine phosphorylase, and mitomycin C is capable of upregulating the expression of thymidine phosphorylase suggesting a synergistic effect. Fifty-three patients (median age 62 years) with anthracycline- and taxane-resistant, metastatic breast cancer received mitomycin C 6 mg/m(2) on day 1, and capecitabine (Xeloda) 2,000 mg/m(2)/day from day 1 to day 14 with cycles repeated every 4 weeks. Overall, 77.4% had visceral metastases and 33 were pretreated with >/=3 chemotherapy lines. A median of 6 cycles were given (range 1-19) with a complete response observed in 2 patients (3.9%), partial response in 17 (33.3%) and stable disease in 19 (37.2%). Overall response rate was 37.2% (95% CI, 24.0-50.5%), with a median duration of 10.4 months. Median time to progression was 8.1 months and median survival was 17.4 months (1- and 2-year survival rates of 60 and 28%, respectively). Toxicity was mild. The most frequent grade 3/4 events were neutropenia (5.7% of patients), diarrhea (3.8%), and deep venous thrombosis (3.8%). Capecitabine plus mitomycin C may represent an effective and manageable treatment option for advanced breast cancer patients resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes. This approach provides an alternative for pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer.     

TX方案治疗铂类治疗失败的进展期胃癌的临床疗效分析

目的:评价紫杉醇联合卡培他滨作为含铂类药物治疗失败的进展期胃癌二线治疗的疗效及安全性。方法:既往接受FP或者FOLFOX4方案化疗的进展期胃癌患者36例,采用TX方案化疗,紫杉醇145mg/m2静脉滴注3h,d1;卡培他滨2000mg/m2,分2次口服,d1-14,21天为一个周期,随访观察疗效,不良反应,进展时间和生存期。结果:36例患者共接受142个周期的化疗,中位化疗周期数4个。全组36例患者中有35例可评价疗效及不良反应,其中8例部分缓解,有效率为22.8%(95%CI:8.2%-37.5%)。中位进展时间和生存时间分别为4.8个月(95%CI:2.9-6.2)和8.1个月(95%CI:6.4-12.7)。Ⅲ/Ⅳ度不良反应主要为骨髓抑制、手足综合征及脱发。结论:紫杉醇联合卡培他滨方案二线治疗进展期胃癌疗效确切,不良反应小,尤其对老年患者耐受性好。     

吉西他滨联合卡培他滨治疗耐药转移性乳腺癌56例临床分析

为了评估吉西他滨(GEM)和卡培他滨(CAP)3周联合化疗方案在蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药的转移性乳腺癌(MBC)患者中的有效性和毒性,对56例既往用过蒽环类和紫杉类的MBC患者给予GEM1000mg/m2,静脉滴入30min,d1、d8;CAP2000mg/m2,分2次口服,d1～d14,每3周为1个周期。所有患者均评估毒性,至少用过2个周期的患者评估疗效。结果:56例患者共完成196个周期化疗,中位化疗周期数为3.5个周期。完全缓解4例,部分缓解22例,稳定18例,进展12例,有效率为46.4%(26/56)。最常见的毒副反应为骨髓抑制和手足综合征。初步研究结果提示,GEM和CAP联合化疗方案在既往接受过蒽环类和紫杉类药物的MBC患者中是安全有效的,血液学和非血液学毒性都可耐受。     

Ixabepilone: clinical role in metastatic breast cancer

Ixabepilone has shown promising clinical data in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and may be particularly valuable in patients showing progression after treatment with standard chemotherapy. This article reviews the developing clinical profile of ixabepilone in MBC. Unlike taxanes and anthracyclines, ixabepilone has low susceptibility to multiple mechanisms of tumor cell resistance and has activity against tumors resistant to taxanes and/or anthracyclines. In phase II studies, single-agent ixabepilone resulted in objective response rates ranging from 11.5% to 57% in patients who had locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, including patients who were treated as first-line therapy or in resistant patients who had received multiple lines of previous treatment. In two large phase III studies in women who had locally advanced or MBC pretreated with or resistant to taxanes and/or anthracyclines, a combination of ixabepilone plus capecitabine was superior to capecitabine alone in terms of progression-free survival and response rates. The efficacy of ixabepilone has also been shown in subsets, including patients with poor prognosis, the first-line metastatic setting, and in triple-negative disease. Studies are underway to investigate this agent in combination with biologics. A recent three-arm study has shown the activity and tolerability of ixabepilone plus bevacizumab; however, comparative data are not yet available. The toxicity profile of ixabepilone is generally manageable and predictable. The most common adverse events associated with ixabepilone include peripheral neuropathy and neutropenia. Ixabepilone appears to offer a promising alternative chemotherapeutic agent for patients with MBC who progress on various taxanes, anthracyclines, and capecitabine.     

TX方案治疗铂类治疗失败的进展期胃癌的临床疗效分析

目的：评价紫杉醇联合卡培他滨作为含铂类药物治疗失败的进展期胃癌二线治疗的疗效及安全性。方法：既往接受FP或者FOLFOX4方案化疗的进展期胃癌患者36例,采用TX方案化疗,紫杉醇145mg/m2静脉滴注3h,d1;卡培他滨2000mg/m2,分2次口服,d1-14,21天为一个周期,随访观察疗效,不良反应,进展时间和生存期。结果：36例患者共接受142个周期的化疗,中位化疗周期数4个。全组36例患者中有35例可评价疗效及不良反应,其中8例部分缓解,有效率为22.8%（95%CI：8.2%-37.5%）。中位进展时间和生存时间分别为4.8个月（95%CI：2.9-6.2）和8.1个月（95%CI：6.4-12.7）。Ⅲ/Ⅳ度不良反应主要为骨髓抑制、手足综合征及脱发。结论：紫杉醇联合卡培他滨方案二线治疗进展期胃癌疗效确切,不良反应小,尤其对老年患者耐受性好。     

A phase I study of capecitabine in combination with vinorelbine in advanced breast cancer

A phase I study was conducted in order to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of the combination of vinorelbine and capecitabine in patients affected with metastatic breast cancer. Eighteen patients with histologically confirmed advanced breast cancer, who had failed =1 prior chemotherapy regimen, were enrolled. The median age was 56 years (range, 39-70 years). All but 1 had previously received a combination of anthracyclines and taxanes; performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) was 0/1 or 2 in 13 and 5 patients, respectively. Vinorelbine was administered at a fixed dosage of 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. Capecitabine was administered orally, at an escalated dose ranging from 1400 mg/m2 to 2250 mg/m2 for 14 consecutive days starting on day 1 of the cycle, divided into 2 daily doses delivered half an hour after eating at 12-hour intervals. Three patients were treated at each dose level: if 1 patient developed a DLT, an additional 3 patients were treated at the same dose level. If 2 additional patients experienced DLT, no further escalation was allowed and the previous dose level was declared MTD. Dose-limiting toxicity was reached at 2250 mg/m2 of capecitabine with 3 out of 3 patients experiencing grade 4 neutropenia plus grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 oral mucositis in 1 patient). Thus, MTD was defined at 2000 mg/m2 capecitabine. Other observed grade 2 side effects were: 1 patient with neutropenia, 1 with hand-foot syndrome, 2 with mucositis, 1 with cutaneous rash, and 1 with thrombocytopenia. With regard to response rate, we observed 1 complete response (5.5%), 6 partial responses (33%), and 4 disease stabilizations (22%). The median time to progression was 12 weeks and the median survival 41 weeks. The MTD of capecitabine in combination with vinorelbine at 25 mg/m2 dosage on days 1 and 8 of a 3-week schedule is 2000 mg/m2/day for 14 consecutive days. Moreover, this regimen showed interesting activity with 61% overall disease control (complete plus partial response plus disease stabilization) in patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes warranting further investigations in a large, multicenter phase II study.