肿瘤研究与临床
腫瘤研究與臨床
종류연구여림상
CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINIC
2012年
12期
809-812
,共4页
裘光贤%周兆春%石阳%崔舒晟
裘光賢%週兆春%石暘%崔舒晟
구광현%주조춘%석양%최서성
乳腺肿瘤%药物疗法,联合%长春瑞滨%顺铂%吉西他滨%卡培他滨
乳腺腫瘤%藥物療法,聯閤%長春瑞濱%順鉑%吉西他濱%卡培他濱
유선종류%약물요법,연합%장춘서빈%순박%길서타빈%잡배타빈
Breast neoplasms%Drug therapy,combination%Navelbine%Cisplatin%Gemcitabinein%Capecitabine
目的 比较长春瑞滨联合顺铂(NP)方案和吉西他滨联合卡培他滨(GX)方案二线治疗蒽环类和(或)紫杉类耐药晚期乳腺癌患者的疗效和不良反应.方法 75例晚期乳腺癌患者按信封法随机分为两组,其中NP组40例,GX组35例.NP方案:长春瑞滨25 mg/ m2,静脉滴注,第1、8天；顺铂25 mg/m2,静脉滴注,第1天至第3天；21d为1个周期.GX方案:吉西他滨1000 mg/ m2,静脉滴注,第1、8天；卡培他滨2500 mg/m2,分2次口服,第1天至第14天；21 d为1个周期,2个周期后评价疗效和不良反应.结果 NP组和GX组总有效率分别为42.5％(17/40)和40.0％(14/35),中位疾病进展时间分别为7.0和6.5个月,中位生存期分别为15.8和15.0个月,1、2年生存率分别为60.0％、32.5％和57.1％、31.4％,Karnofsky评分提高率分别为50.0％(20/40)和42.9％(15/35).以上差异均无统计学意义(均P＞0.05).两组主要不良反应为骨髓抑制、消化道反应,其中GX组的手足综合征发生率明显高于NP组[29％(10/35)比0],消化道反应NP组明显高于GX组[95％(38/40)比26％(9/35)],差异均有统计学意义(均P＜ 0.05).结论 NP方案与GX方案对晚期乳腺癌患者均有较好疗效,且不良反应均可耐受,可作为蒽环类、紫杉类药物治疗失败的晚期乳腺癌患者解救方案.
目的 比較長春瑞濱聯閤順鉑(NP)方案和吉西他濱聯閤卡培他濱(GX)方案二線治療蒽環類和(或)紫杉類耐藥晚期乳腺癌患者的療效和不良反應.方法 75例晚期乳腺癌患者按信封法隨機分為兩組,其中NP組40例,GX組35例.NP方案:長春瑞濱25 mg/ m2,靜脈滴註,第1、8天；順鉑25 mg/m2,靜脈滴註,第1天至第3天；21d為1箇週期.GX方案:吉西他濱1000 mg/ m2,靜脈滴註,第1、8天；卡培他濱2500 mg/m2,分2次口服,第1天至第14天；21 d為1箇週期,2箇週期後評價療效和不良反應.結果 NP組和GX組總有效率分彆為42.5％(17/40)和40.0％(14/35),中位疾病進展時間分彆為7.0和6.5箇月,中位生存期分彆為15.8和15.0箇月,1、2年生存率分彆為60.0％、32.5％和57.1％、31.4％,Karnofsky評分提高率分彆為50.0％(20/40)和42.9％(15/35).以上差異均無統計學意義(均P＞0.05).兩組主要不良反應為骨髓抑製、消化道反應,其中GX組的手足綜閤徵髮生率明顯高于NP組[29％(10/35)比0],消化道反應NP組明顯高于GX組[95％(38/40)比26％(9/35)],差異均有統計學意義(均P＜ 0.05).結論 NP方案與GX方案對晚期乳腺癌患者均有較好療效,且不良反應均可耐受,可作為蒽環類、紫杉類藥物治療失敗的晚期乳腺癌患者解救方案.
목적 비교장춘서빈연합순박(NP)방안화길서타빈연합잡배타빈(GX)방안이선치료은배류화(혹)자삼류내약만기유선암환자적료효화불량반응.방법 75례만기유선암환자안신봉법수궤분위량조,기중NP조40례,GX조35례.NP방안:장춘서빈25 mg/ m2,정맥적주,제1、8천；순박25 mg/m2,정맥적주,제1천지제3천；21d위1개주기.GX방안:길서타빈1000 mg/ m2,정맥적주,제1、8천；잡배타빈2500 mg/m2,분2차구복,제1천지제14천；21 d위1개주기,2개주기후평개료효화불량반응.결과 NP조화GX조총유효솔분별위42.5％(17/40)화40.0％(14/35),중위질병진전시간분별위7.0화6.5개월,중위생존기분별위15.8화15.0개월,1、2년생존솔분별위60.0％、32.5％화57.1％、31.4％,Karnofsky평분제고솔분별위50.0％(20/40)화42.9％(15/35).이상차이균무통계학의의(균P＞0.05).량조주요불량반응위골수억제、소화도반응,기중GX조적수족종합정발생솔명현고우NP조[29％(10/35)비0],소화도반응NP조명현고우GX조[95％(38/40)비26％(9/35)],차이균유통계학의의(균P＜ 0.05).결론 NP방안여GX방안대만기유선암환자균유교호료효,차불량반응균가내수,가작위은배류、자삼류약물치료실패적만기유선암환자해구방안.
Objective To observe the efficacy and adverse reaction of NP and GX regimens in the treatment of the anthracycline-and-taxane-resistant advanced breast cancer.Methods Totally 75 patients with advanced breast cancer were divided into two groups,and received NP or GX regimen.NP group (n =40):NVB 25 mg/m2,day 1,day 8,iv.drip; DDP 25 mg/m2,day 1-3,iv.drip.GX group (n =35):GEM 1000 mg/m2 day 1,day 8,iv.drip; XEL 2500 mg/m2,day 1-14,bid po.Every 21 days was a cycle.The efficacy and adverse reaction were evaluated after two cycles.Results The overall response rates in the NP and GX group were 42.5 ％ (17/40) and 40.0 ％ (14/35).The median TTP of two group were 7 and 6.5 months.The MST was 15.8 and 15.0 months in the NP and GX group.The 1-and 2-year survival rates were 60.0 ％,32.5 ％ and 57.1％,31.4 ％.The increase ratio of Karnofsky were 50.0 ％ and 42.9 ％.There were not significant difference between the two groups in terms of their treatment response (P ＞ 0.05).The main adverse reactions in the two group were myelosuppression,gastrointestinal reaction and phlebitis.Hand-foot syndrome in GX was significantly higher than that in NP group,Gastrointestinal reactions in NP was significantly higher than that in GX group (P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion NP and GX regimens are effective for patients with metastatic breast cancer,their adverse reactions are tolerable,so they can be regarded as a ltermate regimens for anthracyclines and taxanes resistant patients with metastatic breast cancer.
