Suppr超能文献

多机构重复区域性化疗治疗四肢复发性黑色素瘤的经验。

A multi-institutional experience of repeat regional chemotherapy for recurrent melanoma of extremities.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, San Antonio Military Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 May;19(5):1637-43. doi: 10.1245/s10434-011-2151-z. Epub 2011 Dec 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion (HILP) or isolated limb infusion (ILI) are well-accepted regional chemotherapy techniques for in-transit melanoma of extremity. The role and efficacy of repeat regional chemotherapy for recurrence and which salvage procedure is better remains debatable. We aimed to compare toxicities and clinical outcomes by procedure types and the sequence.

METHODS

Data from 44 patients, who underwent repeat HILPs or ILIs from 3 institutions beginning 1997 to 2010, were retrospectively reviewed. Regional toxicity assessed by Wieberdink grade, systemic toxicity assessed by serum creatine phosphokinase level, length of hospital stay (LOS), response rates at 3 months after the procedure, and time to in-field progression (TTP) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 44 patients, 46% were men and 54% women with a median age of 66 (range 29-85) years at diagnosis. The median follow-up was 21.4 (range 4-153) months. Of 70 ILIs and 28 HILPs, the following groups were identified: group A, ILI → ILI (n = 25); group B, ILI → HILP (n = 10); group C, HILP → ILI (n = 12); and group D, HILP → HILP (n = 3). The comparison of Wieberdink grade, serum creatine phosphokinase level, LOS, and response rate between procedures (HILP vs. ILI), between sequence (initial vs. repeat), and among their interactions showed no statistically significant differences. TTP after initial procedure did not differ between HILP and ILI (P = 0.08), and no survival difference was seen (P = 0.65) when TTP after repeat procedure was compared.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients tolerated repeat regional chemotherapy without increased toxicity or LOS. No statistical difference in clinical outcomes was noted when comparing repeat procedures, even though repeat HILPs showed higher complete response compared to repeat ILIs.

摘要

背景

高热隔离肢体灌注(HILP)或隔离肢体输注(ILI)是治疗肢体转移性黑色素瘤的公认的局部化疗技术。对于复发患者,重复局部化疗的作用和疗效以及哪种挽救性手术更好仍存在争议。我们旨在通过手术类型和顺序比较毒性和临床结果。

方法

回顾性分析了 1997 年至 2010 年期间,来自 3 家机构的 44 名患者重复接受 HILP 或 ILI 的数据。通过 Wieberdink 分级评估局部毒性,通过血清肌酸磷酸激酶水平评估全身毒性,住院时间(LOS),术后 3 个月的反应率以及场内进展时间(TTP)。

结果

44 名患者中,46%为男性,54%为女性,诊断时的中位年龄为 66(范围 29-85)岁。中位随访时间为 21.4(范围 4-153)个月。在 70 次 ILI 和 28 次 HILP 中,确定了以下组:组 A,ILI→ILI(n=25);组 B,ILI→HILP(n=10);组 C,HILP→ILI(n=12);和组 D,HILP→HILP(n=3)。程序之间(HILP 与 ILI)、顺序之间(初次与重复)以及它们的相互作用之间的 Wieberdink 分级、血清肌酸磷酸激酶水平、LOS 和反应率的比较均无统计学显着差异。初次手术后的 TTP 在 HILP 和 ILI 之间无差异(P=0.08),并且在比较重复手术后的 TTP 时,未见生存差异(P=0.65)。

结论

大多数患者耐受重复局部化疗而没有增加毒性或 LOS。当比较重复手术时,即使重复 HILP 显示出比重复 ILI 更高的完全缓解率,也没有观察到临床结果的统计学差异。

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