Will R, Hofmockel G, Langer W, Frohmüller H
Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universität Würzburg.
Urologe A. 1999 May;38(3):258-63. doi: 10.1007/s001200050278.
Colony-stimulating factors (CSF) are frequently used in cases of cytostatic therapy of patients with testicular cancer assuming that they support hematopoietic recovery and, thus, shorten duration of neutropenia as well as reduce infections. Currently, G-CSF and GM-CSF are clinically used. In the present study efficacy and toxicity of these two drugs were investigated and compared in patients with testicular cancer treated by standard chemotherapy. Studying 83 chemotherapy cycles applied to 31 patients with advanced germ cell tumors the effectivity and the side effects of the two CSF were examined by questioning, clinical evaluation, and blood chemistry studies. G-CSF (480 micrograms subcutaneously (s.c.)) were used in 55 and GM-CSF (400 micrograms s.c.) in 28 chemotherapeutic cycles. The indications consisted in the treatment of leukocytopenia on the one hand and in the prophylaxis in subsequent cycles on the other hand. No difference between the two CSF could be found either with regard to postponement of the next cycle (G-CSF: 6.8 vs. GM-CSF: 7.3 days), or to the number of injections per cycle (G-CSF: 8 vs. GM-CSF: 12.5), or to the leukocyte (G-CSF: 2.1 vs. GM-CSF: 1.6 x 10(3)/microliter) or platelet nadir (G-CSF: 0.5 vs. GM-CSF: 0.5 x 10(5)/microliter; mean values of all cycles, respectively). Both CSF did not seem to influence the production of platelets. However, a difference between the two CSF was demonstrated with respect to the toxicity. Frequency (G-CSF: 38.5% vs. GM-CSF: 69.3%) as well as intensity of side effects causing a change of the drug (G-CSF: n = 1 vs. GM-CSF: n = 7) were lower in the case of G-CSF. In conclusion, these data demonstrate no difference was seen between G-CSF and GM-CSF with respect to the efficacy in patients with testicular cancer treated by standard chemotherapy. However, the use of G-CSF seems to be associated with lower toxicity.
集落刺激因子(CSF)常用于睾丸癌患者的细胞抑制治疗,假定其可支持造血功能恢复,从而缩短中性粒细胞减少的持续时间并减少感染。目前,G-CSF和GM-CSF已在临床应用。在本研究中,对接受标准化疗的睾丸癌患者,研究并比较了这两种药物的疗效和毒性。通过询问、临床评估和血液化学研究,对31例晚期生殖细胞肿瘤患者应用的83个化疗周期中这两种CSF的有效性和副作用进行了检查。55个化疗周期使用G-CSF(皮下注射480微克),28个化疗周期使用GM-CSF(皮下注射400微克)。适应证一方面为治疗白细胞减少症,另一方面为预防后续周期的发生。在推迟下一个周期(G-CSF:6.8天 vs. GM-CSF:7.3天)、每个周期的注射次数(G-CSF:8次 vs. GM-CSF:12.5次)、白细胞最低点(G-CSF:2.1 vs. GM-CSF:1.6×10³/微升)或血小板最低点(G-CSF:0.5 vs. GM-CSF:0.5×10⁵/微升;分别为所有周期的平均值)方面,未发现两种CSF之间存在差异。两种CSF似乎均不影响血小板的生成。然而,在毒性方面显示出两种CSF之间存在差异。G-CSF导致药物改变的副作用频率(G-CSF:38.5% vs. GM-CSF:69.3%)以及强度(G-CSF:n = 1 vs. GM-CSF:n = 7)较低。总之,这些数据表明,在接受标准化疗的睾丸癌患者中,G-CSF和GM-CSF在疗效方面无差异。然而,使用G-CSF似乎毒性较低。