中华临床医师杂志（电子版）
中華臨床醫師雜誌（電子版）
중화림상의사잡지（전자판）
CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICIANS(ELECTRONIC VERSION)
2013年
22期
10062-10065
,共4页
张彦%李曼%赵璐%乔京京
張彥%李曼%趙璐%喬京京
장언%리만%조로%교경경
乳腺肿瘤%癌,导管,乳腺%表柔比星%预后%毒副反应
乳腺腫瘤%癌,導管,乳腺%錶柔比星%預後%毒副反應
유선종류%암,도관,유선%표유비성%예후%독부반응
Breast neoplasms%Carcinoma,ductal,breast%Epirubicin%Prognosis%Toxic reaction
目的：比较CEF-60、CEF-75与CEF-100方案对浸润性乳腺癌辅助化疗的预后及不良反应。方法214例Ⅰ～Ⅲ期乳腺癌患者随机分为三组行术后辅助化疗，表柔比星小剂量组（CEF-60）71例，表柔比星常规剂量组（CEF-75）74例，表柔比星大剂量组（CEF-100）69例，21 d为一周期，行6～8周期化疗。对三组患者的无病生存状况、生存状况及毒副反应进行分析。结果 CEF-60组1年、3年、5年无病生存率及总生存率为85.92%、67.61%、57.75%及94.37%、85.92%、74.65%，均明显低于CEF-75及CEF-100组，其中CEF-60与CEF-75及CEF-100组间3年、5年无病生存率及5年总生存率差异有统计学意义（P＝0.018，P＝0.033，P＝0.048）， CEF-75与CEF-100组1年、3年、5年无病生存率及总生存率相当。CEF-100组Ⅲ～Ⅳ度白细胞下降发生率为49.28%，明显高于CEF-75及CEF-60组，三组间差异有统计学意义（P＝0.013）；CEF-100组Ⅲ～Ⅳ度消化道反应发生率为36.23%，明显高于CEF-75及CEF-60组，三组间差异具有统计学意义（P＝0.017）。结论 CEF-75是预后较好、毒副作用较小的乳腺癌辅助化疗适用方案。
目的：比較CEF-60、CEF-75與CEF-100方案對浸潤性乳腺癌輔助化療的預後及不良反應。方法214例Ⅰ～Ⅲ期乳腺癌患者隨機分為三組行術後輔助化療，錶柔比星小劑量組（CEF-60）71例，錶柔比星常規劑量組（CEF-75）74例，錶柔比星大劑量組（CEF-100）69例，21 d為一週期，行6～8週期化療。對三組患者的無病生存狀況、生存狀況及毒副反應進行分析。結果 CEF-60組1年、3年、5年無病生存率及總生存率為85.92%、67.61%、57.75%及94.37%、85.92%、74.65%，均明顯低于CEF-75及CEF-100組，其中CEF-60與CEF-75及CEF-100組間3年、5年無病生存率及5年總生存率差異有統計學意義（P＝0.018，P＝0.033，P＝0.048）， CEF-75與CEF-100組1年、3年、5年無病生存率及總生存率相噹。CEF-100組Ⅲ～Ⅳ度白細胞下降髮生率為49.28%，明顯高于CEF-75及CEF-60組，三組間差異有統計學意義（P＝0.013）；CEF-100組Ⅲ～Ⅳ度消化道反應髮生率為36.23%，明顯高于CEF-75及CEF-60組，三組間差異具有統計學意義（P＝0.017）。結論 CEF-75是預後較好、毒副作用較小的乳腺癌輔助化療適用方案。
목적：비교CEF-60、CEF-75여CEF-100방안대침윤성유선암보조화료적예후급불량반응。방법214례Ⅰ～Ⅲ기유선암환자수궤분위삼조행술후보조화료，표유비성소제량조（CEF-60）71례，표유비성상규제량조（CEF-75）74례，표유비성대제량조（CEF-100）69례，21 d위일주기，행6～8주기화료。대삼조환자적무병생존상황、생존상황급독부반응진행분석。결과 CEF-60조1년、3년、5년무병생존솔급총생존솔위85.92%、67.61%、57.75%급94.37%、85.92%、74.65%，균명현저우CEF-75급CEF-100조，기중CEF-60여CEF-75급CEF-100조간3년、5년무병생존솔급5년총생존솔차이유통계학의의（P＝0.018，P＝0.033，P＝0.048）， CEF-75여CEF-100조1년、3년、5년무병생존솔급총생존솔상당。CEF-100조Ⅲ～Ⅳ도백세포하강발생솔위49.28%，명현고우CEF-75급CEF-60조，삼조간차이유통계학의의（P＝0.013）；CEF-100조Ⅲ～Ⅳ도소화도반응발생솔위36.23%，명현고우CEF-75급CEF-60조，삼조간차이구유통계학의의（P＝0.017）。결론 CEF-75시예후교호、독부작용교소적유선암보조화료괄용방안。
Objective To compare the prognosis and side effects of CEF-60 regimen, CEF-75 regimen and CEF-100 regimen as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. Methods 214 patients who had stageⅠto Ⅲ breast cancer were randomly divided into CEF-60 group with 71 cases, CEF-75 group with 74 cases, CEF-100 group with 69 cases, all patients received adjuvant therapy after operation, 21 days one period, for 6 to 8 periods. The data of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were retrospectively analyzed. Results The 1-year, 3-year, 5-year DFS and 1-year, 3-year, 5-year OS of CEF-60 group were 85.92%, 67.61%, 57.75% and 94.37%, 85.92%, 74.65%, were lower than CEF-75 group and CEF-100 group. The 3-year, 5-year DFS and 5-year OS of these three groups had statistical difference(P=0.018, P=0.033, P=0.048). The 1-year, 3-year, 5-year DFS and 1-year, 3-year, 5-year OS of CEF-75 group were similar to the CEF-100 group. The incidence of degree Ⅲ toⅣ leucocytes recduced in CEF-100 group was 49.28%, apparently higher than CEF-60 group and CEF-75 group, the difference of these three groups had statistical significance(P=0.013). The incidence of degree Ⅲ to Ⅳalimentary tract in CEF-100 group was 36.23%, apparently higher than CEF-60 group and CEF-75 group, the difference of these three groups had statistical significance(P=0.017). Conclusion CEF-75 regimen is the best choice of these three regimens which has good prognosis and little toxic reaction.
