Suppr超能文献

一项比较两种新辅助和辅助化疗方案在局部晚期头颈癌多模式治疗中的随机研究。

A randomized study comparing two regimens of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy in multimodal therapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer.

作者信息

Vokes E E, Panje W R, Mick R, Kozloff M F, Moran W J, Sutton H G, Goldman M D, Tybor A G, Weichselbaum R R

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Illinois.

出版信息

Cancer. 1990 Jul 15;66(2):206-13. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19900715)66:2<206::aid-cncr2820660203>3.0.co;2-x.

Abstract

Two regimens of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for previously untreated patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer were compared with the goal of identifying a regimen with a greater than 50% complete response (CR) rate. Patients with a performance status of 0 to 2 and normal end-organ function were randomized to receive either four cycles of neoadjuvant methotrexate, cisplatin, and continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (MPF) (arm A), or four cycles of bleomycin, cisplatin, and methotrexate (PBM) alternating with cisplatin and 5-FU (PF) (arm B). Patients with a performance status of greater than 2 or a carbon monoxide diffusion capacity of less than 50% of the predicted value were assigned to the arm A regimen but were analyzed separately (arm C). Local therapy consisted of surgery (for patients with resectable disease) or radiation therapy followed by two cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with the regimen that was administered initially. Of the 42 patients who were evaluated, 16 were randomized to arm A, 13 to arm B, and 13 to arm C. The clinical CR rate was 19% on arm A (95% confidence interval, 0% to 38%), 39% on arm B (95% confidence interval, 12% to 66%) (P = 0.41), and 54% on arm C (95% confidence interval, 27% to 81%). At a median follow-up time of 35 months, the 2-year actuarial survival rate was 61% on arm A, 69% on arm B (the P value was not significant), and 38% on arm C. The 2-year survival rate for all 42 patients who were treated was 57% and the median survival time was 31 months. Toxicities of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on all arms consisted of mild to moderate myelosuppression and renal toxicity. The incidence of moderate to severe mucositis was significantly higher on arm A than arm B (P = 0.02). Two cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy were administered to only 11 of 42 patients due to patient refusal or cumulative toxicity. In conclusion, both neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens resulted in similar response and survival rates, but mucositis was more severe with arm A. However, since neither regimen was likely to cause a CR rate of greater than 50%, this study was closed to further patient accrual.

摘要

对先前未经治疗的局部晚期头颈癌患者的两种新辅助化疗方案进行了比较,目的是确定一种完全缓解(CR)率大于50%的方案。体能状态为0至2且终末器官功能正常的患者被随机分配接受四个周期的新辅助甲氨蝶呤、顺铂和持续输注5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)(MPF)(A组),或四个周期的博来霉素、顺铂和甲氨蝶呤(PBM)与顺铂和5-FU(PF)交替使用(B组)。体能状态大于2或一氧化碳弥散能力低于预测值50%的患者被分配到A组方案,但单独进行分析(C组)。局部治疗包括手术(适用于可切除疾病的患者)或放疗,随后用最初使用的方案进行两个周期的辅助化疗。在42例接受评估的患者中,16例被随机分配到A组,13例到B组,13例到C组。A组的临床CR率为19%(95%置信区间,0%至38%),B组为39%(95%置信区间,12%至66%)(P = 0.41),C组为54%(95%置信区间,27%至81%)。在中位随访时间35个月时,A组的2年精算生存率为61%,B组为69%(P值无统计学意义),C组为38%。所有42例接受治疗患者的2年生存率为57%,中位生存时间为31个月。所有组新辅助化疗的毒性包括轻度至中度骨髓抑制和肾毒性。A组中重度黏膜炎的发生率显著高于B组(P = 0.02)。由于患者拒绝或累积毒性,42例患者中只有11例接受了两个周期的辅助化疗。总之,两种新辅助化疗方案导致的缓解率和生存率相似,但A组的黏膜炎更严重。然而,由于两种方案都不太可能导致CR率大于50%,该研究停止招募更多患者。

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