中国药师
中國藥師
중국약사
CHINA PHARMACIST
2014年
10期
1707-1713
,共7页
孙习鹏%陈燕%杨黎%陆瑶华%郭澄
孫習鵬%陳燕%楊黎%陸瑤華%郭澄
손습붕%진연%양려%륙요화%곽징
卡培他滨%替吉奥%奥沙利铂%顺铂%胃癌%Meta分析
卡培他濱%替吉奧%奧沙利鉑%順鉑%胃癌%Meta分析
잡배타빈%체길오%오사리박%순박%위암%Meta분석
Capecitabine%S-1%Oxaliplatin%Cisplatin%Gastriccancer%Meta-analysis
目的::评价卡培他滨联合奥沙利铂或顺铂与替吉奥联合奥沙利铂或顺铂治疗晚期胃癌的有效性和安全性。方法:采用计算机检索Cochrane Library、Pubmed、Embase、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普中文科技期刊全文数据库(VIP)、万方数据库,对符合纳入标准的随机对照试验( RCT)进行质量评价和Meta分析。结果:共纳入14项RCT,合计1051例患者。卡培他滨化疗组和替吉奥化疗组的总有效率、完全缓解率和部分缓解率的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。安全性方面,卡培他滨化疗组手足综合征的发生率高于替吉奥化疗组[RR=2.59,95%CI(1.61,4.17),P<0.0001],而口腔黏膜炎的发生率低于替吉奥化疗组[RR=0.64,95%CI(0.50,0.82),P=0.0004]。恶心呕吐、腹泻、神经毒性、肝脏毒性、肾脏毒性、贫血、白细胞减少、中性粒细胞减少和血小板减少等不良反应的发生率两组的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:卡培他滨联合铂类与替吉奥联合铂类治疗晚期胃癌的有效性相似,但卡培他滨联合铂类更易引起手足综合征,而替吉奥联合铂类更易引起口腔黏膜炎。
目的::評價卡培他濱聯閤奧沙利鉑或順鉑與替吉奧聯閤奧沙利鉑或順鉑治療晚期胃癌的有效性和安全性。方法:採用計算機檢索Cochrane Library、Pubmed、Embase、中國期刊全文數據庫(CNKI)、維普中文科技期刊全文數據庫(VIP)、萬方數據庫,對符閤納入標準的隨機對照試驗( RCT)進行質量評價和Meta分析。結果:共納入14項RCT,閤計1051例患者。卡培他濱化療組和替吉奧化療組的總有效率、完全緩解率和部分緩解率的差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05)。安全性方麵,卡培他濱化療組手足綜閤徵的髮生率高于替吉奧化療組[RR=2.59,95%CI(1.61,4.17),P<0.0001],而口腔黏膜炎的髮生率低于替吉奧化療組[RR=0.64,95%CI(0.50,0.82),P=0.0004]。噁心嘔吐、腹瀉、神經毒性、肝髒毒性、腎髒毒性、貧血、白細胞減少、中性粒細胞減少和血小闆減少等不良反應的髮生率兩組的差異均無統計學意義(P>0.05)。結論:卡培他濱聯閤鉑類與替吉奧聯閤鉑類治療晚期胃癌的有效性相似,但卡培他濱聯閤鉑類更易引起手足綜閤徵,而替吉奧聯閤鉑類更易引起口腔黏膜炎。
목적::평개잡배타빈연합오사리박혹순박여체길오연합오사리박혹순박치료만기위암적유효성화안전성。방법:채용계산궤검색Cochrane Library、Pubmed、Embase、중국기간전문수거고(CNKI)、유보중문과기기간전문수거고(VIP)、만방수거고,대부합납입표준적수궤대조시험( RCT)진행질량평개화Meta분석。결과:공납입14항RCT,합계1051례환자。잡배타빈화료조화체길오화료조적총유효솔、완전완해솔화부분완해솔적차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05)。안전성방면,잡배타빈화료조수족종합정적발생솔고우체길오화료조[RR=2.59,95%CI(1.61,4.17),P<0.0001],이구강점막염적발생솔저우체길오화료조[RR=0.64,95%CI(0.50,0.82),P=0.0004]。악심구토、복사、신경독성、간장독성、신장독성、빈혈、백세포감소、중성립세포감소화혈소판감소등불량반응적발생솔량조적차이균무통계학의의(P>0.05)。결론:잡배타빈연합박류여체길오연합박류치료만기위암적유효성상사,단잡배타빈연합박류경역인기수족종합정,이체길오연합박류경역인기구강점막염。
Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine or S-1 combined with oxaliplatin or cisplatin in the treat-ment of advanced gastric cancer. Methods:Six databases including Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Embase, CNKI, VIP and WanFang were retrieved. Randomized controlled trials ( RCT) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer were involved for the quality assess-ment and Meta-analysis. Results:A total of 14 RCT involving 1 051 patients were included. There were no significant differences in the total effective rate, complete remission rate and partial remission rate between the two groups(P>0. 05). In the safety evaluation, the incidence of hand-foot syndrome was higher in capecitabine-based regimens than that in S-1-based regimens[RR=2. 59,95%CI (1. 61,4. 17),P<0. 000 1], while the incidence of stomatitis was lower in capecitabine-based regimens[RR=0. 64,95%CI(0. 50, 0. 82),P=0. 000 4]. The other adverse reactions such as nausea and vomiting, diarrhea,neuropathy,dysfunction of liver and kidney, anemia, leukopenia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia exhibited no significant differences between the two groups(P>0. 05). Con-clusion:Capecitabine combined with oxaliplatin or cisplatin has similar efficacy with S-1 combined with oxaliplatin or cisplatin in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, and the incidence of hand-foot syndrome is higher in capecitabine-based regimens and the inci-dence of stomatitis is higher in S-1-based regimens.