中国卫生标准管理
中國衛生標準管理
중국위생표준관리
CHINA HEALTH STANDARD MANAGEMENT
2015年
19期
120-121
,共2页
乳腺癌%TEC方案%CEF方案%新辅助化疗
乳腺癌%TEC方案%CEF方案%新輔助化療
유선암%TEC방안%CEF방안%신보조화료
Breast cancer%TEC regimen%CEF regimen%Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
目的:对比乳腺癌术后化疗中TEC与CEF方案的疗效及毒副作用。方法选取我院确诊为乳腺癌的268例患者,分为CEF组(n=146)和TEC组(n=122),对比不同化疗方案后的疗效及毒副作用。结果CEF组总有效率为51.1%(P<0.05);TEC组总有效率为83.5%(P<0.05);TEC组的中性粒细胞减少及脱发的发生率低于CEF组(P<0.05),其余毒副作用包括恶心呕吐、腹泻、贫血、血小板减少、心脏及神经毒性,两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 TEC治疗方案疗效更好,临床可作为术后乳腺癌常规的新辅助化疗方案。
目的:對比乳腺癌術後化療中TEC與CEF方案的療效及毒副作用。方法選取我院確診為乳腺癌的268例患者,分為CEF組(n=146)和TEC組(n=122),對比不同化療方案後的療效及毒副作用。結果CEF組總有效率為51.1%(P<0.05);TEC組總有效率為83.5%(P<0.05);TEC組的中性粒細胞減少及脫髮的髮生率低于CEF組(P<0.05),其餘毒副作用包括噁心嘔吐、腹瀉、貧血、血小闆減少、心髒及神經毒性,兩組差異無統計學意義(P>0.05)。結論 TEC治療方案療效更好,臨床可作為術後乳腺癌常規的新輔助化療方案。
목적:대비유선암술후화료중TEC여CEF방안적료효급독부작용。방법선취아원학진위유선암적268례환자,분위CEF조(n=146)화TEC조(n=122),대비불동화료방안후적료효급독부작용。결과CEF조총유효솔위51.1%(P<0.05);TEC조총유효솔위83.5%(P<0.05);TEC조적중성립세포감소급탈발적발생솔저우CEF조(P<0.05),기여독부작용포괄악심구토、복사、빈혈、혈소판감소、심장급신경독성,량조차이무통계학의의(P>0.05)。결론 TEC치료방안료효경호,림상가작위술후유선암상규적신보조화료방안。
Objective To compare the efficacy and toxicity of TEC and CEF regimen in postoperative chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer.Methods 268 patients with breast cancer in our hospital were divided into two groups,the CEF group(n = 146)and the TEC group (n = 122),and treated by CEF and TEC regimens respectively.The efficacy and toxicity were compared in the two groups.Results The total effective rate was 51.1% in the CEF group and 83.5%(P< 0.05). The incidence of neutropenia and hair loss in the TEC group was lower than the CEF group.The rest of the side effects including nausea,vomiting, diarrhea, anemia, thrombocytopenia, heart and the nerve toxicity, had no obvious difference in the two groups. ConclusionTEC treatment effect is more apparent, and can be used as a conventional neoadjuvant chemotherapy.