鸦胆子油乳联合顺铂腔内注入治疗恶性胸腔积液

[目的]观察鸦胆子油乳联合顺铂腔内注入治疗恶性胸腔积液疗效.[方法] 60例经细胞或/和病理学确诊的恶性胸腔积液患者全部行腔内置管引流并随机分组,治疗组:鸦胆子油乳加顺铂腔内注入;对照组:单用顺铂腔内注入.两组均每剧用药2次.[结果]用药4周后根据胸水量评价疗效:治疗组缓解率86%,对照组缓解率51%;两组缓解率比较有显著性差异(P＜0.01),毒副作用较单用顺铂无明显增加.[结论]腔内置管引流应用鸦胆子油乳加顺铂腔内注入治疗恶性胸腔积液疗效显著,明显优于单用顺铂,且毒副作用小.     

热疗联合胸腔灌注恩格菲治疗晚期恶性胸水

[目的]观察热疗联合胸腔灌注恩格菲治疗晚期恶性胸水的临床疗效.[方法]24例晚期癌症恶性胸水的患者,采用胸腹腔穿刺置入中心静脉导管,引流胸水后灌注恩格菲,随后给予局部加热治疗.[结果]有效率79.1%,毒副作用较轻,耐受性好.[结论]热疗联合胸腔灌注恩格菲是治疗晚期癌症恶性胸水较有效的方法之一.     

经皮胸腔内置管灌注顺铂及白介素Ⅱ联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液

目的:观察经皮胸腔内置管灌注顺铂及白介素-Ⅱ联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液的疗效.方法:所有42例恶性胸腔积液患者均行经皮胸腔内中心静脉导管置管持续胸水引流并随机分成两组,对照组22例胸腔内注入DDP及IL-2,治疗组20例在以上治疗的同时配合热疗.结果:胸水控制率治疗组为85%,对照组为59.1%,治疗组疗效明显优于对照组(P＜0.05).结论:经皮胸腔内置管顺铂及白介素-Ⅱ灌注联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液疗效确切,具有良好的应用前景.     

经皮胸腔内置管灌注顺铂及白介素Ⅱ联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液

目的:观察经皮胸腔内置管灌注顺铂及白介素-Ⅱ联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液的疗效。方法:所有 42例恶性胸腔积液患者均行经皮胸腔内中心静脉导管置管持续胸水引流并随机分成两组,对照组22例胸腔内注入DDP及IL-2,治疗组20例在以上治疗的同时配合热疗。结果:胸水控制率治疗组为85％,对照组为59．1％,治疗组疗效明显优于对照组(P<0．05)。结论:经皮胸腔内置管顺铂及白介素-Ⅱ灌注联合热疗治疗恶性胸腔积液疗效确切,具有良好的应用前景。     

置管引流并灌注治疗高龄肺癌恶性胸腔积液

目的:观察胸腔内中心静脉导管引流并灌注治疗高龄肺癌恶性胸腔积液疗效和不良反应.方法: 2007年7月-2009年7月,对46例高龄肺癌恶性胸腔积液患者应用中心静脉导管胸腔引流,并随机分为A组(23例)和B组(23例).A组予生理盐水60ml加卡铂400mg胸腔灌注,每周1次,共2次;B组予鸦胆子油乳60ml胸腔内灌注,每周2次,共4次.比较两组治疗前、后胸水的变化、胸水中癌胚抗原(CEA)浓度变化、KS评分和不良反应.结果: A组、B组有效率分别为86.9% 和60.9% ,差异有统计学意义( P<0.05),两组治疗后Karnofsky评分升高率分别为52.2%和43.5%,无统计学意义.两组治疗后胸水中CEA浓度较治疗前明显下降(P<0.05),A组较B组明显降低(P<0.05),A组骨髓抑制较B组严重,其余不良反应比较无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论： 胸腔内置管引流并灌注治疗肺癌恶性胸腔积液的方法简便易行、创伤小、安全,卡铂疗效优于鸦胆子油乳.     

鸦胆子油乳治疗40例恶性胸腔积液

[目的]观察鸦胆子油乳剂胸腔内注射治疗恶性胸腔积液的疗效和副作用。[方法]对40例恶性胸腔积液患者,采用胸腔穿刺或放置引流管排尽胸水后,胸腔内每次注入鸦胆子油乳剂50￣100ml,隔4日1次,最多4次为1个疗程。1个月后观察疗效和副作用。[结果]鸦胆子油乳剂治疗恶性胸腔积液的有效率为85%(34/40),不良反应为发热(<38℃)4例,轻度胸痛1例。[结论]鸦胆子油乳剂腔内注射治疗恶性胸腔积液疗效显著,副作用轻。     

香菇多糖胸腔灌注联合射频热疗治疗癌性胸水

[目的]观察香菇多糖胸腔灌注联合射频热疗对癌性胸水的临床疗效.[方法]53例癌性胸水病人随机分为两组,治疗组27例采用香菇多糖胸腔灌注联合射频热疗;对照组26例单用香菇多糖胸腔灌注治疗.[结果]治疗组有效率及KPS评分(92.59%,73.15±7.92)较对照组(50.0%,52.84±9.41)明显提高,两组比较差异有显著性(P＜0.05).[结论]香菇多糖胸腔灌注联合射频热疗能显著提高癌性胸水的治疗效果,值得临床推广应用.     

胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液30例

[目的]观察胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液的疗效。[方法]治疗组30例置管引流排尽胸水后胸腔内灌注顺铂与香菇多糖；对照组29例置管引流排尽胸水后胸腔内灌注顺铂。采用WHO胸腔积液疗效通用标准评估疗效。[结果]治疗组有效率（83.3％）高于对照组（55．1％），具有显著性差异（χ^2=5．516，P〈0．05）。治疗组Kamofsky评分改善率（80．0％）高于对照组（48．3％），具有显著性差异（χ^2=6．474，P〈0．05）。[结论]胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液有较好疗效，并能提高患者生活质量。     

胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液30例

[目的]观察胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液的疗效。[方法]治疗组30例置管引流排尽胸水后胸腔内灌注顺铂与香菇多糖；对照组29例置管引流排尽胸水后胸腔内灌注顺铂。采用WHO胸腔积液疗效通用标准评估疗效。[结果]治疗组有效率（83.3％）高于对照组（55．1％），具有显著性差异（χ^2=5．516，P〈0．05）。治疗组Kamofsky评分改善率（80．0％）高于对照组（48．3％），具有显著性差异（χ^2=6．474，P〈0．05）。[结论]胸腔置管引流后灌注顺铂与香菇多糖治疗恶性胸腔积液有较好疗效，并能提高患者生活质量。     

热疗联合胸腔置管化疗治疗恶性胸腔积液临床研究

目的观察热疗联合胸腔置管化疗治疗恶性胸腔积液的临床疗效及其毒副反应。方法62例恶性胸腔积液患者随机分为射频热疗联合胸腔置管化疗组(治疗组)和单纯胸腔置管化疗组(对照组)各31例。对照组先行胸腔闭式引流后,将顺铂60 mg、氟尿嘧啶1.0 g、吡喃阿霉素40 mg各加生理盐水50 ml胸腔内注射,再将地塞米松20 mg胸腔内注射后夹管,每周1次,灌注2次后拔管观察,治疗组于胸腔注射药物后行热疗,当周再行1次单纯热疗,一疗程4次。结果对照组胸腔积液控制有效率为54.8%,治疗组为83.9%,两组差异有显著性(P<0.05)。对照组生活质量改善率为48.4%,治疗组为77.4%,两组差异有显著性(P<0.05)。两组化疗毒副反应发生率差异无显著性。与热疗相关的毒副反应为局部皮肤疼痛4例(13.0%),皮下脂肪硬结3例(9.7%)。结论热疗联合胸腔置管化疗治疗恶性胸腔积液是一种安全可靠、高效低毒的治疗方法,值得临床推广使用。     

Experience with Impedance Phlebography Compared with Venography

Venography is a particularly reliable method for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis but is not suitable as a screening test. Impedance phlebography represents another attempt to discover a simple, non-invasive and reliable method of detecting deep venous thrombosis. It does not, however, meet these criteria.     

Compliance with guidelines and correlation with outcome in patients with advanced germ-cell tumours

PurposeTo evaluate prior compliance with guidelines in patients treated with salvage chemotherapy for advanced germ-cell tumours (GCT).Patients and methodsData concerning the initial management of patients requiring salvage chemotherapy for GCT at Institut Gustave Roussy between 2000 and 2010 were obtained and correlated with recommendations for treatment. Criteria of non-compliance were defined based on guidelines. Compliance with guidelines, predictive factors for non-compliance and the impact on outcome were analysed.ResultsAmong 82 patients treated in the salvage setting, guidelines to initial treatment were followed in only 41 cases (50%). The most common non-compliance criteria were non-adherence to the planned dose (16%), an inappropriate interval between first-line chemotherapy cycles (16%), the lack of post-chemotherapy surgery (16%) and a long interval to post-chemotherapy surgery (48%). Compliance with standard care was better in cancer centres than in other hospitals (private or public) (Odd Ratio (OR): 6.9, P = 0.001). A poor-risk status according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) was also predictive of compliance in univariate but not in multivariate analysis. No significant difference in outcome after salvage chemotherapy was observed. Patients relapsing after non-compliant first-line therapy tended to be more easily salvaged, which is consistent with the fact that their initial treatment was inadequate. Some of these relapses were therefore probably not due to true biologically refractory disease.ConclusionGuidelines for first-line treatment are adhered to in only half the patients requiring salvage chemotherapy. As the only predictive factor for non-compliance was the treating centre, centralisation of patients with GCT in well-trained hospitals should be recommended.     

Treatment with methylnaltrexone is associated with increased survival in patients with advanced cancer

BackgroundMethylnaltrexone (MNTX), a peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor (MOR) antagonist, is FDA-approved for treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). Preclinical data suggest that MOR activation can play a role in cancer progression and can be a target for anticancer therapy.Patients and methodsPooled data from advanced end-stage cancer patients with OIC, despite laxatives, treated in two randomized (phase III and IV), placebo-controlled trials with MNTX were analyzed for overall survival (OS) in an unplanned post hoc analysis. MNTX or placebo was given subcutaneously during the double-blinded phase, which was followed by the open-label phase, allowing MNTX treatment irrespective of initial randomization.ResultsIn two randomized, controlled trials, 229 cancer patients were randomized to MNTX (117, 51%) or placebo (112, 49%). Distribution of patients' characteristics and major tumor types did not significantly differ between arms. Treatment with MNTX compared with placebo [76 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) 43–109 versus 56 days, 95% CI 43–69; P = 0.033] and response (laxation) to treatment compared with no response (118 days, 95% CI 59–177 versus 55 days, 95% CI 40–70; P < 0.001) had a longer median OS, despite 56 (50%) of 112 patients ultimately crossing over from placebo to MNTX. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that response to therapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.29–0.76; P = 0.002) and albumin ≥3.5 (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.30–0.69; P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for increased OS. Of interest, there was no difference in OS between MNTX and placebo in 134 patients with advanced illness other than cancer treated in these randomized studies (P = 0.88).ConclusionThis unplanned post hoc analysis of two randomized trials demonstrates that treatment with MNTX and, even more so, response to MNTX are associated with increased OS, which supports the preclinical hypothesis that MOR can play a role in cancer progression. Targeting MOR with MNTX warrants further investigation in cancer therapy.Clinical trials numberNCT00401362, NCT00672477.     

Costs associated with complications are lower with capecitabine than with 5‐fluorouracil in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND:

Capecitabine, an oral alternative to 5‐fluorouracil (5‐FU) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), has equal clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile; however, its use may be limited because of unit cost concerns. In this study, the authors measured the cost of chemotherapy‐related complications during treatment with capecitabine‐ and 5‐FU–based regimens.

METHODS:

Patients with CRC who received at least 1 administration of capecitabine or 5‐FU during 2004 and 2005 were identified from the Thomson MarketScan research databases. Monthly frequency and cost for 23 complications were recorded. Logistic regression was used to predict complication probability. General linear models were used to predict monthly complication cost and total monthly expenditure.

RESULTS:

In total, 4973 patients with CRC met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Although the most frequently observed complications were the same between capecitabine and 5‐FU (nausea and vomiting, infection, anemia, neutropenia, diarrhea), each was observed with greater frequency in 5‐FU–based regimens. The mean predicted monthly complication cost was significantly higher (by 136%) with 5‐FU monotherapy than with capecitabine monotherapy (difference, $601; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], $469‐$737). In addition, the mean predicted monthly complication cost for 5‐FU+oxaliplatin was higher than the cost with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (difference, $1165; 95% CI, $892‐$1595). When acquisition, administration, and complication costs were taken into consideration, there were no significant differences in the total cost between capecitabine regimens and 5‐FU regimens.

CONCLUSIONS:

Capecitabine compared well with 5‐FU–based therapy in patients with CRC and was associated with lower complication rates and associated costs. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Living with secondary breast cancer: coping with an uncertain future with unmet needs

JOHNSTON S.R.D. (2010) European Journal of Cancer Care 19 , 561–563 Living with secondary breast cancer: coping with an uncertain future with unmet needs     

奥沙利铂联合羟基喜树碱治疗晚期胃癌临床分析

背景与目的体外及体内的临床研究显示,奥沙利铂(L-OHP)对多种肿瘤有显著抑制作用并与绝大多数抗癌药物具有相加或协同细胞毒作用.本文旨在观察L-OHP联合羟基喜树碱(HCPT)治疗晚期胃癌的近期疗效和患者耐受性,并与传统的化疗方案进行对比.方法采用非随机的分组方法将43例晚期胃癌患者分为L-OHP+HCPT方案组(治疗组)与Vp-16+CF+5-FU(ELF)方案组(对照组),其中男性28例,女性15例,中位年龄59岁,KPS评分≥60,观察两组的近期疗效和患者耐受性.结果治疗组24例有效率58.3%(14/24),对照组19例有效率42.1%(8/19).治疗组有效率高于对照组,两组差异有显著性(P<0.05).两组不良反应主要是骨髓抑制、恶心、呕吐、口腔炎、周围神经炎、静脉炎、脱发等,均在Ⅰ、Ⅱ度范围内.结论L-OHP联合HCPT方案治疗晚期胃癌疗效较好,不良反应可以耐受.     

Varicella-Zoster Virus Prophylaxis with Low-Dose Acyclovir in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Treated with Bortezomib

BackgroundVaricella-zoster virus (VZV) reactivation is a common complication in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with bortezomib, with an incidence rate of 10%-60%. The aim of our study was to analyze the effect of acyclovir prophylaxis in this patient population.Patients and MethodsWe studied 98 consecutive patients with relapsed MM treated with bortezomib. Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² was given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle. At first, patients did not receive any VZV prophylaxis, but because of the high incidence of VZV reactivation, VZV prophylaxis with acyclovir was implemented subsequently.ResultsA total of 11 patients treated with bortezomib did not have any VZV prophylaxis, and 4 of these 11 patients (36%) developed VZV reactivation in the form of herpes zoster. No VZV reactivations were observed in the 32 patients who received acyclovir 400 mg 3 times daily or the 55 patients who received acyclovir in a dose reduced to 400 mg once daily during bortezomib treatment.ConclusionVaricellazoster virus reactivation is a common and serious adverse effect of bortezomib treatment. Acyclovir 400 mg once daily is sufficient to protect from VZV reactivation in patients with MM treated with bortezomib.