CAJ | 학술논문

目的比较PAD方案与VAD方案治疗多发性骨髓瘤的临床疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析72例多发性骨髓瘤患者的治疗情况，其中PAD组38例，VAD组34例，对其中化疗4~6个疗程的患者的疗效及安全性进行全面评价。结果 PAD组总有效率74.28%，VAD组总有效率61.76%，两组疗效有统计学差异（P＜0.05），而VAD组不良反应较轻微，耐受性较好。结论 PAD方案疗效明显优于VAD方案，但不良反应发生率明显高于VAD方案（均P＜0.01）。PAD方案可以提高疗效，但要高度重视治疗过程中的不良反应。
목적비교PAD방안여VAD방안치료다발성골수류적림상료효여안전성。방법회고성분석72례다발성골수류환자적치료정황，기중PAD조38례，VAD조34례，대기중화료4~6개료정적환자적료효급안전성진행전면평개。결과 PAD조총유효솔74.28%，VAD조총유효솔61.76%，량조료효유통계학차이（P＜0.05），이VAD조불량반응교경미，내수성교호。결론 PAD방안료효명현우우VAD방안，단불량반응발생솔명현고우VAD방안（균P＜0.01）。PAD방안가이제고료효，단요고도중시치료과정중적불량반응。
Objective To compare the curative efficacy and safety between PAD regimen and VAD regimen in treatment of patients with multiple myeloma. Methods Seventy two patients with multiple myeloma were treated with PAD regimen(borte-zomib, doxorubicin and dexamethasone) or VAD regimen (vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone). The effectiveness and toxicity after 4 to 6 courses of chemotherapy were retrospectively compared. Results The overal effective rates of PAD and VAD groups were 74.28%and 61.76%, respectively(P<0.05). Compared to PAD group the adverse reactions of VAD group were milder and more tolerable. Conclusion PAD regimen has better effectiveness but more adverse reactions than VAD regimen in treatment of multiple myeloma.