现代消化及介入诊疗
現代消化及介入診療
현대소화급개입진료
MODERN DIGESTION & INTERVENTION
2014年
6期
360-363
,共4页
多西他赛%二联疗法%三联疗法%老年%低分化胃癌
多西他賽%二聯療法%三聯療法%老年%低分化胃癌
다서타새%이련요법%삼련요법%노년%저분화위암
Docetaxel%Double regimen therapy%Triple regimen therapy%Elderly patients%Unresectable gastric cancer
目的：对比以多西他赛为主二联和三联疗法对老年低分化胃癌的临床效果。方法将60例老年低分化胃癌患者随机分成三联化疗组和二联化疗组，每组30例。二联化疗组给予多西他赛联合奥沙利铂方案化疗，三联化疗组给予多西他赛联合奥沙利铂、替吉奥方案化疗。对两组近期疗效、KPS评分、肿瘤进展时间（TTP）、生存时间（OS）及不良反应进行比较。结果二联化疗组客观缓解率、临床获益率为36.7%、63.3%，三联化疗组客观缓解率、临床获益率为33.3%、70.0%，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；治疗后，二联化疗组KPS评分为（71.5±6.6）分，显著性低于三联化疗组的（79.5±7.9）分，差异有统计学意义（P <0.05）；二联化疗组TTP为8.5个月，三联化疗组TTP为8.7个月，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；二联化疗组OS为13.4个月，三联化疗组OS为15.1个月，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）；二联化疗组不良反应（白细胞降低、贫血、乏力）率显著低于三联化疗组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论相比于多西他赛为主三联疗法，多西他赛为主二联疗法对对老年低分化胃癌效果同样显著，且不良反应较少，适合老年人使用。
目的：對比以多西他賽為主二聯和三聯療法對老年低分化胃癌的臨床效果。方法將60例老年低分化胃癌患者隨機分成三聯化療組和二聯化療組，每組30例。二聯化療組給予多西他賽聯閤奧沙利鉑方案化療，三聯化療組給予多西他賽聯閤奧沙利鉑、替吉奧方案化療。對兩組近期療效、KPS評分、腫瘤進展時間（TTP）、生存時間（OS）及不良反應進行比較。結果二聯化療組客觀緩解率、臨床穫益率為36.7%、63.3%，三聯化療組客觀緩解率、臨床穫益率為33.3%、70.0%，差異無統計學意義（P>0.05）；治療後，二聯化療組KPS評分為（71.5±6.6）分，顯著性低于三聯化療組的（79.5±7.9）分，差異有統計學意義（P <0.05）；二聯化療組TTP為8.5箇月，三聯化療組TTP為8.7箇月，差異無統計學意義（P>0.05）；二聯化療組OS為13.4箇月，三聯化療組OS為15.1箇月，差異無統計學意義（P>0.05）；二聯化療組不良反應（白細胞降低、貧血、乏力）率顯著低于三聯化療組，差異有統計學意義（P<0.05）。結論相比于多西他賽為主三聯療法，多西他賽為主二聯療法對對老年低分化胃癌效果同樣顯著，且不良反應較少，適閤老年人使用。
목적：대비이다서타새위주이련화삼련요법대노년저분화위암적림상효과。방법장60례노년저분화위암환자수궤분성삼련화료조화이련화료조，매조30례。이련화료조급여다서타새연합오사리박방안화료，삼련화료조급여다서타새연합오사리박、체길오방안화료。대량조근기료효、KPS평분、종류진전시간（TTP）、생존시간（OS）급불량반응진행비교。결과이련화료조객관완해솔、림상획익솔위36.7%、63.3%，삼련화료조객관완해솔、림상획익솔위33.3%、70.0%，차이무통계학의의（P>0.05）；치료후，이련화료조KPS평분위（71.5±6.6）분，현저성저우삼련화료조적（79.5±7.9）분，차이유통계학의의（P <0.05）；이련화료조TTP위8.5개월，삼련화료조TTP위8.7개월，차이무통계학의의（P>0.05）；이련화료조OS위13.4개월，삼련화료조OS위15.1개월，차이무통계학의의（P>0.05）；이련화료조불량반응（백세포강저、빈혈、핍력）솔현저저우삼련화료조，차이유통계학의의（P<0.05）。결론상비우다서타새위주삼련요법，다서타새위주이련요법대대노년저분화위암효과동양현저，차불량반응교소，괄합노년인사용。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of docetaxel-containing double regimen and triple regimen for elderly patients with unresectable advanced gastric cancer. Methods Sixty elderly patients with unresectable advanced poorly differentiated gastric cancer were randomly divided into double regimen group and triple regimen group, 30 cases in each group. Patients in double regimen group were treated by doc-etaxel combined with oxaliplatin, and patients in triple regimen group were treated by docetaxel combined with oxaliplatin and S-1. The short-term efficacy, KPS score, time to tumor progression (TTP), overall survival time (OS), and adverse reactions were compared. Results The objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were 36.7%and 63.3%in double regimen group , and 33.3%and 70.0%in triple regimen group (P>0.05);After treatment, the KPS score in double regimen group was 71.5 ± 6.6, which was significantly lower than 79.5 ± 7.9 points in triple regimen group (P<0.05); The TTPs of double regimen group and triple regimen group were 8.5 months and 8.7 months, the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05); The OS of double regimen group and triple regimen group were 13.4 months and 15.1 months, the difference was not sta-tistically significant (P>0.05). The rate of adverse reaction (leukopenia, anemia, fatigue) in double regimen group was significantly lower than in triple regimen group (P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with docetaxel-based triple therapy, docetaxel-based double therapy also has good effect for elderly patients with unresectable poorly differentiated gastric cancer.
