局部晚期宫颈癌化疗联合放疗最佳模式探讨

目的 放疗是局部中晚期宫颈癌的主要治疗方式,目前同步放化疗已经成为局部中晚期宫颈癌的标准治疗模式,诱导化疗和辅助化疗在同步放化疗时代的角色未明,其疗效与预后的优劣并未达成共识,本研究旨在通过回顾性分析探讨局部中晚期宫颈鳞癌的最佳治疗模式,为临床治疗提供理论依据.方法 回顾性分析2008-01-01-2010-01-31湖南省肿瘤医院收治的212例初治中晚期宫颈鳞癌患者,根据治疗方式分为A、B和C3组,诱导及辅助化疗为TP方案,即紫杉醇联合顺铂,同步放化疗为顺铂单药或顺铂联合紫杉醇,A组(对照组):同步放化疗82例,B组(观察组):诱导化疗联合同步放化疗98例,C组(观察组):同步放化疗联合辅助化疗32例,观察比较3组的近期疗效、远期疗效和不良反应.结果 A、B和C组近期疗效分别为93.90％、94.90％和96.88％,差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05;A、B和C组总生存率(0S)第1年分别为90.24％、90.82％和87.50％;第3年分别为85.37％、87.76％和81.25％;第5年分别为82.93％、83.67％和75.00％;3组比较差异均无统计学意义,P＞0.05.A、B和C组局控率分别为86.58％、86.73％和87.50％,差异性无统计学意义,P＞0.05;A、B和C组无进展生存率分别为67.07％、74.49％和68.75％,差异均无统计学意义,P＞0.05;A、B和C组无远处转移生存率分别为70.73％、93.08％和71.88％,差异有统计学意义,P＜0.05.不良反应主要表现为观察组3级以上白细胞及血小板减少.进一步比较观察组间骨髓抑制差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05;消化道反应及肝功能损害3组比较差异均无统计学意义,P＞0.05;晚期放射性损伤主要表现为放射性直肠炎和放射性膀胱炎,3组比较差异无统计学意义,P＞0.05.结论 诱导化疗可以提高局部晚期宫颈癌的无远处转移率,有延长OS趋势;辅助化疗对局部晚期宫颈癌未见明显生存获益;诱导化疗联合同步放化疗是一种较为有效的局部晚期宫颈癌治疗方案,值得临床进一步推广使用,并通过大样本资料研究加以证实.     

长春瑞滨和奥沙利铂方案同步放化疗治疗Ⅲ期非小细胞肺癌随机对照临床观察

目的观察长春瑞滨、奥沙利铂方案同步放化疗治疗非手术选择的局部晚期(Ⅲ期)非小细胞肺癌的可行性及患者的耐受性,并比较同步放化疗前后联合诱导化疗或辅助化疗不同化疗时序对疗效及毒副反应的影响。方法49例经病理或细胞学确诊的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者随机分为A、B两组。A组24例予长春瑞滨联合奥沙利铂方案诱导化疗2周期后,从第3周期第1天开始施行同步放化疗,放疗期间继续原方案化疗2周期。B组25例于长春瑞滨联合奥沙利铂方案第1周期化疗第1天开始实行放疗,放疗期间化疗2周期,同步放化疗结束后即第3周期开始予原方案巩固2周期。两组化疗方案均采用长春瑞滨联合奥沙利铂方案化疗(长春瑞滨25 mg/m2,第1天及第8天;奥沙利铂130 mg/m2,第1天)。放疗采用6MV X射线,三维适形放疗技术,常规剂量分割,DT40 Gy后缩野,追加剂量至DT60 Gy。结果所有患者均顺利完成治疗。A组有效率62.5%(CR 2例,PR 13例),1,2年生存率分别为62.5%和41.7%;B组有效率64.0%(CR 3例,PR 13例),1,2年生存率分别为64.0%和44.0%,两组间差异无显著性。毒副反应主要是白细胞减少,周围神经感觉异常,恶心、呕吐,放射性食道炎及肺炎。发生率以诱导化疗组高,但差异无显著性,严重毒副反应少。结论长春瑞滨联合奥沙利铂方案同步放化疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌近期疗效较理想,毒副反应轻,患者能耐受。同步放化疗前后诱导与巩固化疗时序对疗效及毒副反应影响不大。     

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。     

NP方案联合三维适形放疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效分析

目的：探讨长春瑞滨、顺铂同期联合三维适形放疗治疗不能手术的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效及患者耐受性。方法：对68例经病理或细胞学确诊的不能手术选择的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者随机分为A、B两组。A组35例给长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案诱导化疗2周期后,从第3周期第1天开始施行同步放化疗,放疗期间继续原方案化疗2周期。B组33例给长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案第1周期化疗第1天开始实行放疗,放疗期间化疗2周期,同步放化疗结束后即第3周期开始予原方案巩固化疗2周期。两组化疗方案均采用长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案化疗（长春瑞滨25mg／m2,第l、8天;顺铂25mg／m2,第1、2、3天,28天重复）。放疗采用6MV—X射线,前程普通照射,后程三维适形放疗,常规剂量分割,普通外照射DT40Gy后缩野,改用三维适形放疗技术,追加剂量至DT60—66Gy。结果：所有患者均顺利完成治疗。A组有效率48．6％（CR3例,PR18例）,1,2年生存率分别为51．4％和34．3％;B组有效率75．8％（CR5例,PRl9例）,1,2年生存率分别为78．8％和65．6％,两组间差异有显著性。不良反应主要是白细胞减少,恶心、呕吐,放射性食道炎及肺炎。发生率以诱导化疗组高,但差异无显著性,严重不良反应少。结论：长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案同步放化疗治疗不能手术的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌近期疗效较理想,不良反应轻,患者能耐受。同步放化疗后巩固化疗效果较诱导化疗后同步放化疗提高了生存率,两种治疗方法的不良反应无较大区别。     

NP方案联合三维适形放疗治疗局部晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效分析

目的:探讨长春瑞滨、顺铂同期联合三维适形放疗治疗不能手术的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效及患者耐受性.方法:对68例经病理或细胞学确诊的不能手术选择的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者随机分为A、B两组.A组35例给长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案诱导化疗2周期后,从第3周期第1天开始施行同步放化疗,放疗期间继续原方案化疗2周期.B组33例给长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案第1周期化疗第1天开始实行放疗,放疗期间化疗2周期,同步放化疗结束后即第3周期开始予原方案巩固化疗2周期.两组化疗方案均采用长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案化疗(长春瑞滨25mg/m2,第1、8天;顺铂25mg/m2,第1、2、3天,28天重复).放疗采用6MV-X射线,前程普通照射,后程三维适形放疗,常规剂量分割,普通外照射DT40Gy后缩野,改用三维适形放疗技术,追加剂量至DT60-66Gy.结果:所有患者均顺利完成治疗.A 组有效率48.6%(CR3例,PR18例),1,2年生存率分别为51.4%和34.3%;B组有效率 75.8%(CR5例,PR19例),1,2年生存率分别为78.8%和65.6%,两组间差异有显著性.不良反应主要是白细胞减少,恶心、呕吐,放射性食道炎及肺炎.发生率以诱导化疗组高,但差异无显著性,严重不良反应少.结论:长春瑞滨联合顺铂方案同步放化疗治疗不能手术的局部晚期非小细胞肺癌近期疗效较理想,不良反应轻,患者能耐受.同步放化疗后巩固化疗效果较诱导化疗后同步放化疗提高了生存率,两种治疗方法的不良反应无较大区别.     

局限期小细胞肺癌化疗联合放疗疗效分析

[目的]回顾分析局限期小细胞肺癌经诱导化疗后放疗再巩固化疗与诱导化疗后同步化放疗再巩固化疗的疗效。[方法]患者共71例,诱导化疗4周期后放疗再巩固化疗2周期为A组,24例;诱导化疗2周期后放疗再巩固化疗4周期为B组,22例;诱导化疗2周期后同步放化疗再巩固化疗2周期为C组,25例。化疗为EP方案,放疗为三维适形放疗。治疗后1个月后判断近期疗效,观察复发进展情况,并随访无进展生存时间(PFS)和总生存时间(OS)。有效率比较用卡方检验。生存时间分析采用Kaplan-Meier法,Log-rank检验。[结果]A组、B组和C组有效率分别为75.00%、77.27%和84.00%。三组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。A组、B组和C组中位PFS分别为9个月、10个月和13个月,有统计学意义(P=0.013)。A组、B组和C组中位OS分别为15个月、17个月和21个月,有显著统计学意义(P<0.01)。[结论]诱导化疗2周期后同步化放疗再巩固化疗2周期,能够延长局限期小细胞肺癌患者中位无进展生存时间和总生存时间。     

Ⅲ期非小细胞肺癌诱导化疗后的治疗方式选择

背景与目的在手术或放疗前对肺癌患者实施诱导化疗是治疗局部晚期肺癌的主要治疗手段,本研究的目的是探讨Ⅲ期非小细胞肺癌(non small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)经过诱导化疗后的手术亦或同步放化疗的治疗方式选择。方法Ⅲ期NSCLC接受两个周期诱导化疗后,对化疗效果达到PR或CR、估计能完全切除者,随机分为同步放化疗组或手术治疗组实施治疗,手术完全切除者继续以原方案化疗两个周期。结果共71例Ⅲ期NSCLC患者经诱导化疗后进入治疗组。37例实施同步放化疗,34例实施手术。同步放化疗组的1、2、3年生存率分别为78.4%、40.5%、23.4%,而手术组的1、2、3年生存率则分别为81.1%、39.5%、35.1%,两组中位生存期分别为:(18.0±2.4)个月和(23.0±1.6)个月,生存率无统计学差异(P=0.23)。同步放化疗组和手术组的无病生存期分别为(14.0±1.7)个月;(19.0±3.2)个月,有统计学差异(P=0.044)。结论Ⅲ期NSCLC经诱导化疗后,手术和同步放化疗都是可以选择的治疗方式,同步放化疗是一种相对安全的治疗方式,但毒副反应不可忽视;虽然因为诱导化疗增加了手术...     

TP方案诱导化疗序贯同期放化疗治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌的临床观察

目的 比较多西他赛+顺铂（TP方案）或顺铂+氟尿嘧啶（PF方案）诱导化疗3周期后联合同步放化疗治疗局部晚期鼻咽癌的疗效和安全性。方法 将局部晚期鼻咽癌患者随机分为两组：A组30例接受TP方案诱导化疗（多西他赛75 mg／m2 d1+顺铂75 mg／m2 d2）,每3周重复;B组29例接受PF方案诱导化疗（顺铂75 mg／m2 d1+氟尿嘧啶750 mg／m2 civ d1～d5）。诱导化疗结束3周后行三维适形放疗,20 Gy／次,5次／周,共6周,DT 60 Gy,并联合同步化疗（顺铂80 mg／m2,d1,每3周重复）。评价两组患者的疗效及毒副反应,并随访生存情况。结果A、B两组的有效率（RR）分别为76.7％、79.3％（P.0.05）;中位生存时间分别为39.4个月、36.0个月（P＞0.05）。A、B两组中位无进展生存时间分别为12.7个月、10.3个月,差异有统计学意义（P=0.044）。两组毒副反应主要为血液学毒性、黏膜炎等,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 TP方案诱导化疗联合同期放化疗可延长患者的中位无进展生存时间,且未增加不良反应,可作为局部晚期鼻咽癌治疗方案之一。     

局部晚期胃癌术后同步放化疗临床研究

目的观察局部晚期胃癌术后辅助同步放化疗的临床疗效。方法将79例胃癌患者随机分为A组和B组。A组39例,第1次ECF化疗结束3周后开始同步放化疗。放疗采用常规四野照射6、0Co和6/15MV直线加速器、三维适型放疗,35天为1周期。放疗第1天及放疗结束前3天均分别行CF＋5-FU方案化疗1周,后继续ECF方案化疗3周期。B组40例,术后单纯ECF方案化疗6周期。结果 A组1、2、5年复发率分别为12.8%、17.9%、23.1%,B组1、2、5年复发率分别为20.0%、32.5%、45.0%,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;A组1、2、5年生存率分别为89.7%、71.8%、48.7%,B组为80.0%、50.0%、30.0%,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论同步放化疗是局部晚期胃癌相对理想的辅助治疗手段。     

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。     

洛铂联合多西他赛行肿瘤细胞减灭术加腹腔热灌注化疗治疗腹膜癌的临床观察

目的 分析洛铂联合多西他赛行肿瘤细胞减灭术（cytoreductive surgery, CRS）加腹腔热灌注化疗（hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, HIPEC）治疗腹膜癌（peritoneal carcinoma, PC）的围手术期安全性及疗效。 方法 PC患者行CRS+HIPEC治疗,药物为洛铂50 mg/m2、多西他赛60 mg/m²,加入12 000 ml 0.9%氯化钠溶液加热至（43±0.5）℃持续灌注60 min。记录术后6天体温和心率变化、围手术期不良事件、血常规及血生化指标、术后患者恢复情况及生存结果。结果 90例PC患者行95次CRS+HIPEC,手术时间180~450 min (中位数485 min）;术后6天最高体温、心率分别为36.4℃~38.6℃（中位数37.5℃）、76~124 bpm（中位数100 bpm）,严重不良事件16例,包括围手术期死亡2例。中位生存期20.8月（95%CI: 13.1~25.8月）,1、3、5年生存率分别为75.6%、45.6%、43.3%。 结论 洛铂联合多西他赛进行CRS+HIPEC治疗PC安全性可接受,有助于延长患者生存期。     

Endoscopic Endonasal Dacryocystorhinostomy: Best Surgical Management for DCR

EEDCR is a highly rewarding Endoscopic procedure for management of dacryocystitis when epiphora does not respond to medications or repeated syringing of nasolacrimal duct. It is a simple, less time consuming, safe but skilful, highly satisfying surgery both for the patients as well as the surgeons. There is very big advantage of EEDCR, it is close 100% successful procedure, even if there is recurrence of epiphora it is again correctable fully with no residual affects. EEDCR is far more superior to External DCR/Laser DCR and there are definite reasons for it. A total number of 578 cases have been operated by me from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2011, only very few reoccurrences were there and they were corrected easily so much so that it can be said that it is a close 100% successful procedure and best surgical management of DACRYOCYSTITIS up to date. The successful outcome was defined as symptomatic relief from epiphora and dacryocystitis and a patent nasolacrimal duct upon syringing at the end of procedure and on follow up of patient.     

参麦注射液对阿霉素所致大鼠心肌损伤保护作用的实验研究

目的　观察参麦注射液 (SMI)对阿霉素 (ADM )诱导大鼠心肌损伤的保护作用和抗氧化作用。方法　选用ADM诱导大鼠心肌损伤模型。SD大鼠 60只 ,随机分为 3个组 ,每组 2 0只 ,分别为正常组、治疗组、对照组。正常组 :实验第 1～ 9天注射生理盐水 ,每天 3ml/kg ,1次 /天。治疗组 :实验第 1～ 9天注射参麦注射液 ,每天 3ml/kg ,1次 /天 ,第 4天注射阿霉素 ,隔天 1次 ,连用 3次 ,用生理盐水配置成 1mg/ml,每次 3mg/kg。对照组实验 1～ 9天注射生理盐水 ,每天 3ml/kg ,1次 /天。第 4天注射阿霉素 ,以后隔天 1次 ,连用 3次 ,用生理盐水配置成 1mg/ml,每次 3mg/kg。到期测定血丙二醛 (MDA )含量和超氧化物歧化酶(SOD )活性 ,并进行心肌病理检查。结果　对照组MDA水平明显高于治疗组 ,对照组SOD水平则显著低于治疗组 ,即加用SMI可提高SOD活性 ,降低MDA含量。SMI能明显减轻大鼠心肌损伤 ,对照组与治疗组比较 ,治疗组心肌损伤明显减轻 ,治疗组与正常组比较无显著性差异。参麦注射液有抗氧化作用 ,与对照组比较 ,血SOD水平升高 ,MDA水平降低 ,心肌病理计分下降。结论参麦注射液有抗氧化作用和对阿霉素所引起的心脏毒性具有保护作用 ,为临床寻找有效的阿霉素所致心肌损伤保护药物提供良好的客观依据 ,值得临床推广应用     

Denosumab in patients with cancer and skeletal metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine the efficacy and safety of denosumab in reducing skeletal-related events (SRE) in patients with bone metastases.

Methods

A literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Collaboration Library identified relevant controlled clinical trials up-to-March 14, 2012. Two independent reviewers assessed studies for inclusion, according to predetermined criteria, and extracted relevant data. The primary outcomes of interest were SRE, time to first on-study SRE, and overall survival. Secondary outcomes included pain, quality of life, bone turnover markers (BTM), and adverse events.

Results

Six controlled trials including 6142 patients were analyzed. Compared to zoledronic acid, denosumab had lower incidence of SRE with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.84 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.80–0.88), delayed the onset of first on-study SRE (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.75–0.90) and time to worsening of pain (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.77–0.91). No difference was observed in overall survival with pooled hazard ratio of 0.98 (95% CI 0.90–1.0). For total adverse events, denosumab was similar to zoledronic acid (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.89–1.0). No significant differences were observed in the frequency of osteonecrosis of the jaw (RR 1.4; 95% CI 0.92–2.1). Patients on denosumab had a greater risk of developing hypocalcemia (RR 1.9; 95% CI 1.6–2.3).

Conclusions

Denosumab was more effective than zoledronic acid in reducing the incidence of SRE, and delayed the time to SRE. No differences were found between denosumab and zoledronic acid in reducing overall mortality, or in the frequency of overall adverse events.     

体内诱导艾氏腹水瘤细胞的耐药性研究

肿瘤细胞耐药性的存在是临床化疗失败的主要原因之一。本实验在小鼠体内用阿霉素（ADR）诱导艾氏腹水瘤细胞（EHR）的耐药性，探讨细胞产生耐药性的机理。HPLC法测定细胞内药物浓度．结果表明耐药细胞─—EHR/ADR细胞内ADR积聚低于EHR细胞，而对ADR外排快于EHR细胞；异博定（VER）增加EHR／ADR细胞对ADR的摄取并阻滞其外排．而对EHR影响不大，揭示EHR／ADR细胞具有MDR特性。     

Oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of palliative oxygen for relief of dyspnoea in cancer patients. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for randomised controlled trials, comparing oxygen and medical air in cancer patients not qualifying for home oxygen therapy. Abstracts were reviewed and studies were selected using Cochrane methodology. The included studies provided oxygen at rest or during a 6-min walk. The primary outcome was dyspnoea. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) were used to combine scores. Five studies were identified; one was excluded from meta-analysis due to data presentation. Individual patient data were obtained from the authors of the three of the four remaining studies (one each from England, Australia, and the United States). A total of 134 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Oxygen failed to improve dyspnoea in mildly- or non-hypoxaemic cancer patients (SMD=-0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.22 to 0.04; P=0.16). Results were stable to a sensitivity analysis, excluding studies requiring the use of imputed quantities. In this small meta-analysis, oxygen did not provide symptomatic benefit for cancer patients with refractory dyspnoea, who would not normally qualify for home oxygen therapy. Further study of the use of oxygen in this population is warranted given its widespread use.     

邻近腋窝的上皮样血管内皮瘤1例报道

We described a case of a 71-year-old woman with an epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) in her left axilla,a rare location which hasn't been reported yet. The patient suffered from numbness, pain and decreased muscle strength of her left upper extremity. Sonography revealed a hypoechoic mass surrounded the axillary artery and brachial artery. No obvious capsule was demonstrated. CT showed a soft-tissue mass with some calcifications and peripheral ring-like en-hancement. The MRI indicated a mass with mainly intermediate signal intensity on Tl-weighted imagine and intermediate signal intensity on T2-weighted imagine. The diagnosis was confirmed by histopathologic examination after surgery. There are some correlations of these imaging features with its histopathologic characters.     

GF方案与TP方案一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床对照研究

Objective  

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacies of initial gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) and paclitaxel plus cisplatin (TP) 1st-line chemotherapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and observe their side effects.     

鼻咽癌患者放射性骨坏死引起的正电子显像假阳性结果1例及文献复习

目的:探讨鼻咽癌(NPC)患者放射性骨坏死(osteoradionecrosis,ORN)引起正电子假阳性结果的原因及避免因此引发诊断错误的方法。方法:回顾性分析1例放疗后的鼻咽癌患者,行鼻咽部MRI及正电子显像后,再行组织病理学检查,对三种结果进行分析、比较。结果:MRI及正电子显像均诊断患者颅底区域肿瘤复发,组织病理学结果则显示鼻咽部病灶为放射性骨坏死。因此正电子扫描结果为假阳性结果。结论:鼻咽癌患者放疗后所致的放射性骨坏死容易引起正电子显像假阳性结果并可能引发不必要的治疗,因此NPC患者的正电子图像,对于可能的局限性肿瘤复发诊断,应该非常慎重。     

Bortezomib-related neuropathy may mask CNS relapse in multiple myeloma: A call for diligence

Background: Neuropathy is a common adverse effect of bortezomib. Isolated central nervous system (CNS) relapse in MM remains exceedingly rare and carries a dismal prognosis. We present an unusual case of bortezomib related neuropathy masking a CNS relapse of MM. Case presentation: A 57-year-old female was diagnosed with standard-risk MM with clinical and cytogenetic features not typically associated with CNS involvement. She was treated with 4 cycles of bortezomib/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone (VCD) and achieved a VGPR, after which she underwent an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) followed by bortezomib maintenance. Six months after ASCT she developed symptoms suggestive of peripheral neuropathy which was attributed to bortezomib. However the symptoms persisted despite discontinuation of bortezomib. Imaging and cerebrospinal fluid analysis subsequently confirmed a CNS relapse. Discussion: CNS involvement in MM (CNS-MM) is uncommon and is considered an aggressive disease. Recently published literature has reported biomarkers with prognostic potential. However, isolated CNS relapse is even less common; an event which carries a very poor prognosis. Given the heterogeneous neurologic manifestations associated with MM, clinical suspicion may be masked by confounding factors such as bortezomib-based therapy. The disease may further remain incognito if the patient does not exhibit any of the high risk features and biomarkers associated with CNS involvement. Conclusion: In the era of proteasome inhibitor (PtdIns)/immunomodulator (IMID)-based therapy for MM which carries neurologic adverse effects, it is prudent to consider CNS relapse early. This case further highlights the need for more robust biomarkers to predict CNS relapse and use of newer novel agents which demonstrate potential for CNS penetration.