论文部分内容阅读
目的 比较NEC方案与IEC方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效及不良反应。方法 本研究为前瞻性随机对照研究 ,共 43例晚期的非小细胞肺癌患者随机入组 ,NEC组 2 2例 ,应用NEC方案 (NVB +VP1 6 +CBP) ,IEC组 2 1例 ,应用IEC方案 (IFO +VP1 6 +CBP)。每 4周为 1周期 ,至少化疗 2周期。按WHO标准观察疗效及不良反应以及生存期。结果 NEC组中 2例CR ,1 1例PR ,6例SD ,3例PD ,有效率 (CR +PR)为 59.1 % ;IEC组中 8例PR ,9例SD ,4例PD ,有效率 (CR +PR)为 38.1 %。NEC组有效率比IEC组高 ,但无统计学差异 (P >0 .0 5)。NEC组中位生存期为 9个月 ,而IEC组为 7月 ,两组无差异 (P >0 .0 5)。两组不良反应均主要为骨髓抑制、恶心呕吐、脱发。Ⅲ +Ⅳ的血白细胞下降NEC组为 35 .0 % ,IEC组为 2 5 .0 % ,两组无差异 (P >0 .0 5)。NEC组的末梢神经炎和局部静脉炎稍高于IEC组。结论 初步的结果显示 ,NEC方案治疗非小细胞肺癌的有效性较高 ,可以作为一线方案在临床使用
Objective To compare the efficacy and adverse reactions of NEC regimen and IEC regimen in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Forty-three patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were enrolled in this study. Twenty-two patients in NEC group were treated with NEC protocol (NVB + VP1 6 + CBP) and 21 patients in IEC group. IEC Protocol (IFO + VP1 6 + CBP). 1 cycle every 4 weeks, at least 2 cycles of chemotherapy. According to the WHO standard observation of efficacy and adverse reactions and survival. Results The CR rate of PR was 59.1% in 2 cases of CR, 11 cases of PR, 6 cases of SD and 3 cases of PD in NEC group, 8 cases of PR, 9 cases of SD and 4 cases of PD in IEC group, CR + PR) was 38.1%. The efficiency of NEC group was higher than that of IEC group, but there was no significant difference (P> 0.05). The median survival was 9 months in the NEC group compared with July in the IEC group, with no difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Two groups of adverse reactions are mainly bone marrow suppression, nausea and vomiting, hair loss. Ⅲ + Ⅳ leukopenia in NEC group was 35.0%, IEC group was 25.0%, no difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). NEC group of peripheral neuritis and local phlebitis slightly higher than the IEC group. Conclusions The preliminary results show that the NEC regimen is highly effective in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer and can be used clinically as a first-line regimen