Suppr超能文献

不同新辅助化疗方案对局部晚期乳腺癌的影响。

Effect of different neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens on locally advanced breast cancer.

作者信息

Coskun U, Gunel N, Onuk E, Yilmaz E, Bayram O, Yamac D, Cihan A, Ucan B, Yildirim Y, Celenkoglu G, Ozkan S

机构信息

Department of Medical Oncology, Gazi University Medical School, 06560 Ankara, Turkey.

出版信息

Neoplasma. 2003;50(3):210-6.

Abstract

In this retrospective study, we evaluated the results of 91 locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) patients (30 patients in stage IIIA - 33.0%, 61 patients in stage IIIB - 67.0%) who had been treated with different neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Forty-three (47.3%) patients treated with FAC (5-Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide) or CA (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin), 33 (36.3%) with FEC (5-Fluorouracil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide) or CE (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin) and 15 (16.5%) with CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-Fluorouracil) combination as neoadjuvant setting. Median follow-up duration was 33 (6-116) months in 91 patients. There was no significant difference in the pretreatment characteristics of patients receiving FAC/CA, FEC/CE and CMF including age, disease stage, menopausal and estrogen/progesteron receptor (ER/PR) status (p>0.05). In CMF group, no patient was treated with taxan as adjuvant setting. However, ten patients (30.3%) in FEC/CE group and 21 patients (48.8%) in FAC/CA group were treated with taxans. Overall response rate was lower in CMF group (60.0%), when compared to FEC/CE (81.9%) and FAC/CA (91.0%) groups (p<0.05). Median overall survival (OS) and diseases free survival (DFS) were similar in three groups; 28.0 months (range: 14.8-41.1) and 12.0 months (range: 5.3-18.6) in CMF, 45.0 months (range: 16.8-73.1) and 23.0 months (range: 0.0-48.6) in FEC/CE, 46.0 months (range: 41.1-50.8) and 22.0 months (range: 11.1-32.8) months in FAC/CA groups, respectively (p>0.05). In conclusion, overall response rates were found to be higher in anthracycline-based combinations than CMF, but these regimens had no additional survival advantage over CMF regimen. Long-term effects of these regimens should be investigated in further randomized trials.

摘要

在这项回顾性研究中,我们评估了91例局部晚期乳腺癌(LABC)患者(ⅢA期30例 - 33.0%,ⅢB期61例 - 67.0%)接受不同新辅助化疗方案的治疗结果。43例(47.3%)患者接受FAC(氟尿嘧啶、多柔比星、环磷酰胺)或CA(环磷酰胺、多柔比星)方案,33例(36.3%)接受FEC(氟尿嘧啶、表柔比星、环磷酰胺)或CE(环磷酰胺、表柔比星)方案,15例(16.5%)接受CMF(环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤、氟尿嘧啶)联合方案作为新辅助治疗。91例患者的中位随访时间为33(6 - 116)个月。接受FAC/CA、FEC/CE和CMF治疗的患者在年龄、疾病分期、绝经状态及雌激素/孕激素受体(ER/PR)状态等预处理特征方面无显著差异(p>0.05)。在CMF组中,没有患者接受紫杉烷类辅助治疗。然而,FEC/CE组有10例患者(30.3%),FAC/CA组有21例患者(48.8%)接受了紫杉烷类治疗。与FEC/CE组(81.9%)和FAC/CA组(91.0%)相比,CMF组的总体缓解率较低(60.0%)(p<0.05)。三组的中位总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS)相似;CMF组分别为28.0个月(范围:14.8 - 41.1)和12.0个月(范围:5.3 - 18.6),FEC/CE组分别为45.0个月(范围:16.8 - 73.1)和23.0个月(范围:0.0 - 48.6),FAC/CA组分别为46.0个月(范围:41.1 - 50.8)和22.0个月(范围:11.1 - 32.8)(p>0.05)。总之,发现基于蒽环类的联合方案的总体缓解率高于CMF,但这些方案与CMF方案相比并无额外的生存优势。这些方案的长期影响应在进一步的随机试验中进行研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验