98 例小细胞肺癌化疗疗效分析

doi:10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.665

98 例小细胞肺癌化疗疗效分析

Analyses of Chemotherapy in Treatment of 98 Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer

摘要

摘要: 目的比较CE方案（CBP、VP-16）、CAP方案（CTX、EPI、DDP）、CE-CAP交替方案治疗晚期小细胞肺癌（Smallcell1ungcancer，SCLC）的临床有效率及不良反应。方法 98例SCLC患者分别接受CE、CAP、CE-CAP交替方案化疗4个周期。结果三种方案治疗的有效率分别为84．8％、80．4％和81％，差异无统计学意义。不良反应主要为骨髓抑制及消化道反应。骨髓抑制以白细胞减少为主，CE组白细胞Ⅲ度减少发生率为10．8％，CAP组发生率为9．7％，CE-CAP交替方案组9．5％，三组比较差异无统计学意义。消化道反应主要为恶心呕吐，CE组中出现Ⅲ～Ⅳ度胃肠道反应的为13％，CAP组中出现的为25．8％，CE．CAP组中出现的为23．8％，CE组和CAP组、CE-CAP组比较差异有统计学意义，而CAP组和CE-CAP组比较差异无统计学意义。结论 CE、CAP方案、CE-CAP交替化疗是治疗SCLC的较好方案，但CE方案胃肠道副作用较轻，耐受性较好，值得推荐。

Abstract: Objective 　To evaluate the efficacy, toxicity and side effects of CE(CBP 、VP-16 ), CAP(CTX 、EPI、DDP) and CE - CAP alternation in the t reatment of patient s with small cell lung cancer ( SCLC) . Methods 　A total of 98 patient s with SCLC diagnosed by pathology were treated with CE, CAP or CECAP regimen for 4 cycles. Results 　The overall response rates of the groups (CE, CAP or CE-CAP) were 84. 8 %、80. 4 % and 81 %respectively, there was no significant difference in the group s. The major toxicity and side effects were bone marrow inhibition and gastrointestinal reaction. Neut ropenia appeared 10. 8 % in CE group, 10. 8 % in CAP and 9. 5 % in CE-CAP group. The difference of hematologic toxicity in the three groups was no significant . Nausea and vomiting occurred 13 % in CE group, 25. 8 % in CAP group, 23. 8 % in CE2CAP group, there was statistically significant difference in the CE group and other two groups, but no significant difference in CAP group and CE-CAP group . Conclusion 　CE, CAP and CE-CAP are the effective regimen in the t reatment of patient s with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) . The difference of the response rates in the three groups is not significant . But there was less toxicity in CE group.

HTML全文

参考文献(0)

施引文献

资源附件(0)