第7版UICC或AJCC鼻咽癌分期的IMRT验证研究

目的 验证第7版 UICC或AJCC 鼻咽癌分期系统在以MR为分期手段、IMRT为基础综合治疗策略下的合理性及适用性。方法 回顾分析2007—2011年间在本院经MRI分期和IMRT治疗的 720例初诊M₀期鼻咽癌患者的生存及失败情况,评价T、N分期对预测患者生存及失败的可靠性。Kaplan-Meier计算生存率,Logrank法检验差异,Cox模型多因素预后分析。结果 第7版 UICC或AJCC 鼻咽癌T分期是OS、CSS、DFS和DMFS的影响因素(P=0.013、0.025、0.001、0.002),但T₁、T₂、T₃期间相近(P=0.054~0.626)。从局部复发和远转风险来看,T₃与T₂期非常接近(P=0.796)。N分期是DFS、DMFS的影响因素(P=0.005,0.000)。但N₀和N₁期间相近(P=0.549、0.707)。在N₀—N₁期中也未发现单纯咽后淋巴结转移对OS、DFS和DMFS有影响(P=0.360、0.083、0.062)。结论 第7版UICC或AJCC鼻咽癌分期系统对经MRI分期和IMRT的鼻咽癌患者预后仍有较好预测价值,但有进一步优化的空间。     

基于调强放疗的鼻咽癌分期探讨

目的 验证鼻咽癌第7版UICC或AJCC分期,并为其进一步修订提供依据。方法 收集2005—2011年间本院收治的经病理确诊、无远处转移并接受根治性IMRT的初治鼻咽癌患者 323例。根据鼻咽癌第7版UICC或AJCC分期标准进行分期。Kaplan-Meier计算生存率,Logrank法检验差异,Cox模型多因素预后分析。结果 5年样本数为 45例。T₁与T₂期、T₂与T₃期 5年LRFS率相近(P=0.055、P=0.746)。将T₂、T₃和T₄期翼内肌组合并为T₂期,T₄期其他的降期为T₃期,新T分期中T₁、T₂、T₃期LRFS曲线明显分开。N₂与N_3a期、N₂与N_3b期、N_3a与N_3b期 5年DMFS率相近(P=0.272、P=0.063、P=0.810)。多因素分析结果显示颈淋巴结部位是DMFS的唯一影响因素(P=0.037)。将N_3a期中颈淋巴为单侧的降期为N₁期,N_3a期中颈淋巴结为双侧的降期为N₂期,则新N分期中N₀、N₁、N₂、N₃期DMFS曲线分开。Ⅰ与Ⅱ期、Ⅲ与 Ⅳ_a期 5年OS相近(P=0.434、P=0.951)。将T₁N_0-1期作为 Ⅰ_{a期、T2N0-1期作为 Ⅰb期、T1-3N2期和(或) T3N0-1期作为Ⅱ期、T1-3N3期作为Ⅲ期,各期 5年OS曲线明显分开。结论 第7版UICC或AJCC分期仍存在不足,推荐新分期能更好预测预后,但需要更大样本量数据验证。}     

基于MRI和IMRT的鼻咽癌鼻窦侵犯的预后研究

目的探讨基于MRI和IMRT的鼻咽癌鼻窦侵犯在鼻咽癌分期中的意义。方法 回顾分析2005—2010年基于MRI诊断的接受IMRT的1197例初诊鼻咽癌患者资料。根据AJCC第7版分期重新分期。鼻窦侵犯分为伴有鼻窦侵犯T₃、T₄期。Kaplan-Meier法计算LRFS、DMFS、OS率并Logrank法检验。Cox模型多因素预后分析及T分期各亚组局部复发风险比。结果 鼻窦侵犯率为14.2%。鼻窦侵犯不是影响鼻咽癌OS、LRFS、DMFS的因素(P=0.677、0.485、0.211)。T₂期、伴鼻窦侵犯T₃期及不伴鼻窦侵犯T₃期局部复发风险比接近(HR=1.927、2.030、2.283)。LRFS、OS曲线在T₂期、伴鼻窦侵犯T₃期及不伴鼻窦侵犯T₃期接近(P>0.05),与伴鼻窦侵犯T₄期及不伴鼻窦侵犯T₄期明显分开(P<0.05)。结论 鼻窦侵犯不是IMRT鼻咽癌OS、LRFS和DMFS的预后因素,但伴鼻窦侵犯的T₃期OS、LRFS与T₂、T₃期相似,预后较T₄期好。     

基于MRI及IMRT下的鼻咽癌新T分期研究

目的 建立一个基于MRI并与IMRT相适应的鼻咽癌新T分期系统。方法 回顾分析2008—2010年我院基于MRI并接受IMRT的608例初治无转移鼻咽癌患者资料,按鼻咽癌第7版UICC/AJCC分期系统进行分期。Kaplan-Meier法计算相关生存率及Logrank检验,Cox法多因素分析。现行UICC/AJCC分期系统存在不足,在此基础上建立新鼻咽癌T分期系统,并对新T分期系统合理性进行评价。结果 5年随访率为94.5%,5年OS、DFS、LRFS、DMFS分别为81.5%、80.1%、86.0%、81.1%。单因素及多因素分析结果显示鼻咽、咽旁间隙、颅底解剖结构均为影响患者OS率因素(P=0.000—0.045)。根据风险差异性及生存曲线分布提出新T分期标准:T₁期:侵袭鼻咽、咽旁间隙、口咽、鼻腔、颅底、翼内肌;T₂期:侵袭翼外肌、鼻窦、眼眶、颅内、颞下窝、颅神经。推荐新T分期系统LRFS曲线及OS曲线均能很好地拉开。结论 推荐新T分期系统能较客观地预测鼻咽癌患者预后,可作为鼻咽癌临床新分期探索性的尝试。     

鼻咽癌UICC第7版分期与中国2008分期比较及分期更新建议

目的 比较鼻咽癌UICC第7版分期及中国2008分期, 并对分期的更新提供参考依据。方法 回顾分析2006—2012年病理确诊的初治无远处转移、接受调强适形放疗的鼻咽癌患者767例。以OS、LRFS、DMFS为主要预后指标, 比较两种分期系统T分期、N分期、临床分期对预后的预测价值。Kaplan-Meier法计算各项生存率, 组间差异比较行Logrank检验, Cox法多因素分析。结果 从T分期来看, 中国2008分期在预测OS、LFFS方面优于UICC分期。从N分期来看, 两种分期在预测OS、DMFS方面相当。从临床分期来看, UICC分期在预测OS方面优于中国2008分期。依据统计结果推荐的新分期中T分期、N分期、临床分期对预后均有较好预测价值。结论 鼻咽癌UICC第7版分期与中国2008分期在预测预后方面各有优势。推荐的新分期方案对当前鼻咽癌分期的更新有一定价值。     

食管癌非手术治疗临床分期新标准的对比研究

目的 比较不同食管癌临床分期对同一组病例的预测价值,并完善T分期标准,为更准确进行临床分期提供参考。方法 回顾分析我院701例根治性放疗食管癌患者,分别按AJCC标准、2004年标准、2009年草案标准并结合GTV-T体积标准进行预后判断。结果 按3种标准进行T分类后,发现AJCC分期偏早,T₁期达23.1%,且T₃与T₄期的生存曲线接近。2004年标准下各期生存曲线分离度均较好,但T₁和T₄期者偏少,分布不均。2009年草案标准中T₃和T₄期生存曲线交叉且T₄期较多达43.2%。根据GTV大小及病变对周围组织器官侵及程度行新T分期,各期生存曲线未见交叉,所占比例较均衡。N分期仍采用N₀、N₁、N₂期分类法,将N分期与新T分期结合进行TNM分期,所得各期生存曲线分离度均很好(P=0.000)。结论 将食管癌局部肿瘤体积大小结合外侵程度确定的T分期与区域内外淋巴结转移确定的N分期联合,能比较准确地预测非手术治疗患者的生存预后。     

基于IMRT时代的第八版AJCC/UICC鼻咽癌临床分期建议

本文首次发表在Cancer,2016,122(4):546-558.

目的 准确的分期系统对癌症的治疗至关重要。随着癌症分期和治疗方法的演变,需要不断评价分期的适用性和改进性。方法 基于第7版AJCC/UICC分期回顾性分析香港和中国大陆2个肿瘤中心收治的 1609例接受调强放射治疗的首诊无转移鼻咽癌患者临床资料,所有患者治疗前均行核磁共振分期评估。结果 无其他T₃、T₄期解剖结构受侵患者中,伴有咀嚼肌间隙(翼内肌和/或翼外肌)侵犯、椎前肌侵犯及咽旁间隙侵犯的三组患者之间OS相近。伴广泛软组织(上述侵犯结构以外的软组织)受侵患者OS与伴有颅内侵犯或颅神经侵犯相似。仅2%患者锁骨上窝以上淋巴结转移者直径>6 cm,其OS率与下颈淋巴结转移者类似。用下颈(环状软骨尾侧缘水平以下)代替锁骨上窝并不影响N分期之间的风险差异性。采用推荐的T、N分期,T₄N_0-2、T_1-4N₃期OS相近。结论 经AJCC/UICC分期筹备委员会审阅后,建议第8版分期应将翼内肌/翼外肌从T₄降到T₂期,增加椎前肌为T₂期,用下颈取代锁骨上窝,将淋巴结最大直径>6 cm合并归为N₃期,将T₄、N₃期统一归为Ⅳ_A期。这些改变不仅使得相邻分期间风险差异性更好,而且使得临床实践性与全球适用性之间达到最佳平衡。     

基于IMRT和RTOG颈部淋巴结分区标准的鼻咽癌N分期研究

目的 建立一个基于IMRT和RTOG颈部淋巴结分区标准的鼻咽癌新N分期。 方法 回顾分析广西医科大学第一附属医院2010—2011年经病理学证实、无DM并接受IMRT的初治鼻咽癌患者324例,根据鼻咽癌UICC/AJCC分期标准(第7版)进行重新分期。Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率,Logrank法单因素预后分析,Cox模型多因素预后分析。 结果 324例患者中269例(83.0%)出现转移淋巴结,中位随访58个月(6~77个月),全组5年OS率为84.8%,DFS率为77.1%,RFS率为92.7%,DMFS率为80.5%。对其中颈部淋巴结阳性患者预后因素分析显示咽后淋巴结、颈部淋巴结水平、侧数是影响鼻咽癌患者预后因素(P值均<0.05)。根据风险比差异确定鼻咽癌新N分期: N₀期为无淋巴结转移;N₁期为Ⅶ_a区或/和单侧上颈(Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、V_a区)淋巴结转移;N₂期为双侧上颈(Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅴ_aa区)淋巴结转移;N₃期为Ⅳ _a、Ⅴ_b区及以下区域淋巴结转移。 结论 基于IMRT和RTOG颈部淋巴结分区标准的鼻咽癌新N分期更符合现状,并能更客观预测预后、指导治疗。     

鼻咽癌原发肿瘤MRI横截面最大径的预后价值分析

目的 评价鼻咽癌原发肿瘤MRI横截面最大径(MDAPPT)的预后价值。方法 搜集2005—2007年间初治、病理证实、无远处转移且行鼻咽部和颈部MRI扫描的鼻咽癌患者333例临床资料,在MRI上测量最大径,Logrank法单因素及Cox法多因素分析其与预后的关系。结果 鼻咽癌T₁、T₂、T₃、T₄期患者MDAPPT中位数分别为21.2、30.0、38.0、52.3 mm。全组MDAPPT≤30、>30~50、>50 mm患者5年总生存(OS)率分别为81.3%、70.1%、51.5%(P=0.000),无进展生存(PFS)率分别为81.3%、70.0%、48.9%(P=0.000),无远处转移生存(DMFS)率分别为85.5%、 86.5%、67.2%(P=0.000),无局部复发生存(LRFS)率分别为97.7%、91.5%、83.3%(P=0.013)。多因素分析发现MDAPPT是影响PFS、DMFS的预后因素。T₃~T₄期MDAPPT≤50、>50 mm患者5年OS和PFS及DMFS分别为69.4%、52.2%(P=0.004)和68.0%、49.6%(P=0.001)及84.0%、66.8%(P=0.001)。全组MDAPPT≤30 mm患者中T₁、T₂、T₃、T₄期的5年LRFS分别为100%、95.8%、96.3%、100%(P=0.643)。结论 MDAPPT是影响鼻咽癌PFS和DMFS的预后因素,MDAPPT是鼻咽癌T晚期患者的重要预后因素,不同T分期中MDAPPT小的局部控制率无差异。     

改良食管癌UICC第七版分期预测术前放疗预后价值分析

目的 评价食管癌术前放疗后病理T、N分期以及国际抗癌联盟(UICC) TNM分期是否能准确预测预后。方法 回顾分析1980—2007年本院接受术前放疗并有详细临床、病理、放疗和手术记录的 311例食管鳞状细胞癌患者资料。Kaplan-Meier法生存分析并Logrank检验和单因素分析。结果 随访率96.5%,随访时间满5、10年者分别为89、43例。全组单因素分析发现放疗后原发部位有无肿瘤残存(T-pCR,χ²=11.53,P=0.001)和淋巴结转移个数(0、1~3、≥4个,χ²=42.13,P=0.000)是影响预后因素。UICC第7版分期可用于区分上述患者预后。而根据转移淋巴结数改良第7版N分期为N₀(0个)、N₁(1~3个)、N₂(≥4个)期并结合残存癌T分期,则ypⅠ期(T_1~2N₀M₀期)与ypⅡ期(T_0-3N₁M₀期+T₃N₀M₀期)、ypⅡ期与ypⅢ期(T₄N_0~1M₀期或T_0-3N₂M₀期)间预后差异均有统计学意义(χ²=11.15、23.39,P=0.001、0.000)。结论 食管鳞状细胞癌术前放疗后病理的T分期和阳性淋巴结个数是影响预后因素。UICC 第7版分期能较准确评价预后,改良第7版N分期后与T分期结合更方便、准确预测预后。     

基于鼻咽癌临床Ⅲ期探讨第8版AJCC/UICC分期系统

目的 基于调强放疗临床Ⅲ期鼻咽癌的生存分析中探讨第8版AJCC/UICC鼻咽癌分期系统。方法 2008-2014年在汕头大学医学院附属肿瘤医院首次治疗的 1351例鼻咽癌患者中按第7、8版标准重新分期,确定Ⅲ期患者分别为742、784例,将其各自分为3个亚组:T3N0-1期为 G1(226、245例),T1-2N2期为 G2(180、187例),T3N2期为G3(336、352例)。Kaplan-Meier法分别计算3个组 5年总生存(OS)、无进展生存(PFS)、无远处转移生存(DMFS)、无局部区域复发生存(LRRFS),并log-rank检验组间差异。结果 第8版病例中93.6%与第7版的相同。第8版与第7版总体的OS、PFS、DMFS、LRRFS分别为84.8%与85.4%、76.2%与77.0%、80.4%与81.3%、89.8%与90.6%(P均>0.05)。第8版分期3个亚组的OS、PFS和DMFS均不同(P均<0.001);G1与 G2、G1与G3也不同(P均<0.05),G2与G3间相近(P=0.183、0.310、0.248)。结论 第8版AJCC/UICC分期系统对临床Ⅲ期病例的分布特点及临床终点相对于第7版变化不大,亚组间仍有明显的组内生存风险分布差异,其中N2对Ⅲ期患者的生存风险评估起到主要作用。可能在IMRT联合化疗时代局部肿瘤对预后的影响已经减弱,第8版分期系统仍然有改进的空间。     

Discussion of the 8th edition of AJCC/UICC staging system from the clinical stage Ⅲ nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Objective To evaluate the 8^th edition of AJCC/UICC staging system for stage Ⅲ nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) by the survival analysis. All patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Methods Among 1351 treatment-naïve NPC patients who received radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy in our hospital from December 2008 to October 2014, 742 and 784 cases were classified as clinical stage Ⅲ based on the criteria of the 7^th and 8^th edition of AJCC/UICC staging systems, respectively. These patients were classified into three subgroups according to the 7^th and 8^th edition of AJCC/UICC staging systems:T3N0-1 as G1(n=226, n=245), T1-2N2 as G2(n=180, n=187) and T3N2 as G3(n=336, n=352). The 5-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and local-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier method. The differences among different groups were evaluated by log-rank test. Results There were 93.6% patients evaluated by the 8^th AJCC/UICC staging system remained the same cohort with those by the 7^th AJCC/UICC staging system. The 5-year OS, PFS, DMFS and LRRFS of the 8^th and 7^th staging systems were 84.8% and 85.4%, 76.2% and 77.0%, 80.4% and 81.3%, 89.8% and 90.6%, respectively (all P>0.05). The OS, PFS or DMFS significantly differed among three subgroups classified by the 8^th staging system (all P<0.001). In addition, statistical significance was observed between G1 and G2, and between G1 and G3(both P<0.05), whereas no statistical significance was noted between G2 and G3(P=0.183, 0.310, 0.248). Conclusions The distribution features and clinical endpoints of clinical stage Ⅲ defined by the 8^th AJCC/UICC staging system are similar to those defined by the 7^th AJCC/UICC staging system. The distribution of survival risk significantly differs among different subgroups. N2 plays a major role in assessing the survival risk of patients with stage Ⅲ NPC. In the era of IMRT plus chemotherapy, the effect of local tumors on clinical prognosis has been diminished. The 8^th AJCC/UICC staging system remains to be further improved.     

鼻咽癌中国1992、2008分期和国际抗癌联盟2010分期标准的比较研究

目的 比较鼻咽癌中国1992、2008分期和国际抗癌联盟(UICC)2010分期标准之间的一致性,评价它们在预测鼻咽癌放疗疗效中的价值.方法 回顾分析2000-2005年间347例无远处转移的初治鼻咽癌患者临床资料,对每例患者分别用中国1992、2008和UICC2010分期标准进行T、N和临床分期.采用Kappa法分析3种分期标准间各期病例数分布的一致性.采用Kaplan-Meier法分别计算3种分期标准的5年总生存率、局部无复发和无远处转移生存率,并用Logrank检验其差异.结果 中国2008分期和UICC 2010分期标准之间的临床分期、T和N分期的病例构成比例的一致性均优于它们各自与1992分期之间的比较,Kappa值分别为0.700、0.881和0.722.3种分期标准下各临床分期的总生存曲线比较只发现Ⅲ与Ⅳ期间的不同,其中2008分期和UICC2010分期标准下Ⅲ与Ⅳ期间的不同(χ2=4.48,P=0.034和χ2=8.88,P=0.003),而1992分期则相似(χ2=0.40,P=0.526).3种分期标准的局部无复发生存率各T1与T2和T2与T3及T3与T4期间的比较均相似(χ2=1.85、0.53、0.50,P=0.174、0.467、0.479和χ2=1.25、2.10、1.99,P=0.264、0.148、0.159及χ2=0.77、0.60、0.87,P=0.381、0.441、0.350).在3种分期标准的各期无远处转移生存率中,1992分期标准的N0与N1、N1与N2、N2与N3间均相似(χ2=3.71、3.11、2.01,P=0.054、0.078、0.156),2008分期标准的N1与N2、N2与N3间不同(χ2=10.49、5.06,P=0.001、0.024);UICC 2010分期标准中仅N1与N2间不同(χ2=7.73,P=0.005).结论 中国2008分期和UICC2010分期标准对鼻咽癌放疗疗效的预测价值相近,且均优于1992分期.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the agreement among Chinese 1992, 2008 and UICC 2010 staging systems of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and evaluate their predictive value of radiotherapeutic prognosis.Methods 347 NPC patients without distant metastasis treated in our hospital from 2000 to 2005 were retrospectively analyzed.Every patient was categorized into T, N, and clinical stage by Chinese 1992, 2008 and UICC 2010 staging systems, respectively.Kappa value was used to evaluate the agreement among three systems.Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the 5-year overall survival (OS), local-free survival (LFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), the difference between subgroup was tested by Logrank.Results The agreement of clinical stage, T and N stage between Chinese 2008 and UICC 2010 staging system was better than that of them compared to 1992 staging system, Kappa value were 0.700、0.881 and 0.722.The agreement of T stage was better than N and clinical stage among these three staging system.The difference of OS between stageⅢ and stage Ⅳ was significant in Chinese 2008 and UICC 2010 staging system (χ2=4.48,P=0.034;χ2=8.88,P=0.003), and with no different in 1992 staging system (χ2=0.40,P=0.526).There was no significant difference of LFS between T1 and T2,T2 and T3,T3 and T4 in all staging systems (χ2=1.85,0.53,0.50,P=0.174,0.467,0.479;χ2=1.25,2.10,1.99,P=0.264,0.148,0.159;χ2=0.77,0.60,0.87, P=0.381,0.441,0.350).There were no significant differencesin 1992 staging system, while there was significant differences of DMFS between N1 and N2, N2 and N3 in 2008 stage system, N1 and N2 in UICC 2010 stage system.Conclusions The predictive value of Chinese 2008 and UICC 2010 staging system for prognosis were similar, and were better than that of 1992 staging system in NPC.     

Retrospective comparison of the AJCC 5th edition classification for nasopharyngeal carcinoma with the AJCC 4th edition: an experience in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the new AJCC 5th edition classification system for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) with the AJCC 4th edition by re-evaluating the staging of patients treated in Taiwan. METHODS: From 1992 through 1996, 117 NPC patients without distant metastasis were treated using complete courses of radiotherapy. All patients had complete CT examinations of the nasopharynx and neck. Each patient was re-staged according to the 5th edition of the AJCC classification system. Their overall survival (OS), loco-regional relapse-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the two staging systems, using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, Wilcoxon test and Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 58.3 months, the 5-year OS for stage I, II, III and IV was 88, 86, 61 and 48%, respectively, according to the new staging. A more even distribution of patients was noted among the patients classified according to the AJCC 5th edition than the 4th edition. The distribution of stages I, II, III and IV was 13.7, 37.6, 15.4 and 33.3%, respectively, using the new staging system, whereas it was 0.8, 14.5, 20.5 and 64.2%, respectively, using the old staging system. More statistically significant differences among 5th edition stages and T classifications than the 4th edition were also noted. CONCLUSIONS: The 5th edition of the AJCC staging system appears to have a more even distribution of patients and more statistically significant differences in predicting prognosis than the 4th edition, mostly in stages and T classification.     

早期鼻咽癌单纯调强放疗的远期疗效评价

目的 评价早期鼻咽癌各亚组根治性调强放疗(IMRT)的远期疗效和副反应.方法 回顾分析2001-2008年在本中心初诊接受IMRT的198例按UICC/AJCC2002分期的早期鼻咽癌的5年生存率、治疗失败因素和急性副反应.Kaplan-Meier法计算生存率并Logrank检验.结果 中位随访时间为50.9个月(12～104个月),随访率为96%,随访满1、3、5年者分别为198、139、72例.全组病例5年的肿瘤相关生存率、鼻咽局部无复发生存率及无远处转移生存率分别为97.3%、97.7%及97.8%.T1、T2期患者5年鼻咽局部无复发生存率分别为100%、96.7%(x2=2.24,P=0.135).T1N0、T2N0、T1N1和T2N1期的5年无远处转移生存率分别为100%、98.8%、100%和93.8%(x2=2.35,P=0.125).全组治疗5年总失败率仪为6.1%(12例)且全部为Ⅱb期患者.急性副反应主要是1、2级黏膜炎及咽喉炎,未发现放射性脑、脊髓病和脑神经损伤的晚期副反应.结论 IMRT早期鼻咽癌能取得较好疗效且治疗副反应轻微;但T2b和T2bN1期患者有相对较高的局部复发和远处转移趋势,也许对这些患者放化疗能进一步获益.

Abstract：

Objective To evaluate the outcomes and toxicities of early stage nasopharyngeal carcinoma(NPC)patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy(IMRT)alone. Methods From February 2001 to January 2008, 198 early stage NPC patients according to AJCC/UICC 2002 staging system were treated by radical radiotherapy with IMRT technique in our institute, the clinical data were analyzed retrospectively. Results The 5-year disease-specific survival, local recurrence-free survival(LRFS)and distant metastasis-free survival(DMFS)were 97.3%, 97.7% and 97. 8% respectively. The 5-year LRFS for T1, T2 patients were 100%, 96. 7%(x2 = 2. 24 ,P = 0. 135)respectively. The 5-year DMFS for T1 N0,T2N0, T1N1, and T2N1 patients were 100%, 98. 8%, 100% and 93. 8%(x2= 2. 35, P= 0. 125)respectively. Grade 1 and 2 mucositis and pharyngitis were most common acute toxicities. Radiation encephalopathy and cranial nerve injury were not observed in all patients. Conclusions IMRT alone for early stage NPC patients can produce satisfactory results and acceptable treatment-relative toxicities. Patients with T2b and T2bN1 had a relatively higher incidence of local recurrence and distant metastasis, which suggested that combination of IMRT and chemotherapy may improve clinical results in those patients.     

非转移性T4期鼻咽癌的预后影响因素分析

目的探讨非转移性ⅣA期鼻咽癌的预后影响因子。方法初治的T4N0~3M0 (UICC 1997版分期)鼻咽癌患者145例纳入临床研究,分析患者的复发、转移、生存情况及预后影响因素。结果145例患者的5年OS、CCS、PFS、DLRFS、DMFS分别为59.2％、61.3％、53.0％、71.6％、62.6％。多因素分析显示：颈动脉鞘区受侵是影响DLRFS、DMFS的不良预后因素,UICC N分期是影响DLRFS、 DMFS的独立预后因素;颈动脉鞘区受侵是影响CCS的独立不良预后因素,年龄、颈部照射剂量、UICC N分期是影响CCS的独立预后因素。单因素分析显示: 颈动脉鞘区受侵、UICC N分期是影响CCS、PFS的预后因素,同期化疗或放疗联合化疗虽提示有提高DMFS及提高CCS的趋势,但差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论颈动脉鞘区受侵、UICC N分期是影响非转移性T4期鼻咽癌的重要预后因子。