Ohta M, Tomoda Y, Kano T
Tokai Ovarian Study Group, Aichi Cancer Center.
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1989 Apr;16(4 Pt 2-1):1008-15.
[OBJECTIVES OF STUDY] This presentation deals with an analysis of factors to improve the survival of patients with ovarian cancer. Some 1051 patients with malignant ovarian tumors who were treated in this group, were divided into two groups for their period of treatment. Of these, 460 patients were treated 1974-1979 (retrospective group) and 591 patients treated 1979-1984, (prospective group) because chemo-immunotherapy was determined by a certain protocol in the group. [RESULTS] The survival rate of the two groups were compared, and the 5-year survival rate of prospective group was 20% higher than in the retrospective group. However, there were no significant differences of any clinical stages between retrospective group and prospective group, and the difference in 5-year survival rate was about 20% in any stages. The survival rate was also compared in accordance with histological types. The most dominant progression was seen in serous adenocarcinoma and when the cases were divided into two groups by their clinical stage; one was the early stage (Stage I) cases. The 5-year survival rate of serous ca, mucinous ca and embryonal ca (Higuchi, Kato) made remarkable progress in recent several years, but, mesonephroid ca made little progress. The other was the late stage (stage II, III, IV) cases, patients with mucinous ca when she had had surgery recurrently on relapse, resulting in prolonged survival period. As to the comparison of age groups, younger patients less than 40 years old showed a progression in their survival period, whereas patients in their sixties had no such progression. In order to evaluate the effect of treatment with due comparable counterpart of ovarian carcinoma, cases were quantified with 3 years survival prediction score which was calculated retrospectively by multivariate statistical analysis. The first evaluation was done with an MFC combination chemotherapy and a CAP combination. The results indicated that a CAP combination had improved the survival rate of ovarian cancer, and statistically significant differences were proved. Z value was 2.24 and P value was less than 5%. The second evaluation was done on the significance of second look operation. The prediction score of patients who underwent second look operation and matched pair control of prediction score without reoperation, were compared. The results indicated that second look operation improved the survival rate of ovarian cancer with statistically significant differences. Z value was 2.37 and P value was less than 5%. [CONCLUSION] According to the present study, the treatment of malignant ovarian tumors showed an improved survival rate of about 20%, regardless of the cl
[研究目的] 本报告分析了提高卵巢癌患者生存率的因素。该组共治疗了约1051例恶性卵巢肿瘤患者,根据治疗时期将其分为两组。其中,460例患者在1974 - 1979年接受治疗(回顾性组),591例患者在1979 - 1984年接受治疗(前瞻性组),因为该组化疗免疫疗法是按照特定方案确定的。[结果] 比较了两组的生存率,前瞻性组的5年生存率比回顾性组高20%。然而,回顾性组和前瞻性组在任何临床分期上均无显著差异,且在任何分期中5年生存率的差异约为20%。还根据组织学类型比较了生存率。最主要的进展见于浆液性腺癌,当病例按临床分期分为两组时;一组是早期(I期)病例。浆液性癌、黏液性癌和胚胎性癌(Higuchi,Kato)的5年生存率近年来有显著进展,但中肾样癌进展甚微。另一组是晚期(II、III、IV期)病例,黏液性癌患者复发时反复接受手术,生存期延长。关于年龄组的比较,40岁以下的年轻患者生存期有进展,而60多岁的患者则没有这种进展。为了用卵巢癌的适当对照来评估治疗效果,通过多变量统计分析回顾性计算了3年生存预测评分对病例进行量化。第一次评估采用MFC联合化疗和CAP联合化疗。结果表明,CAP联合化疗提高了卵巢癌的生存率,且差异具有统计学意义。Z值为2.24,P值小于5%。第二次评估是关于二次探查手术的意义。比较了接受二次探查手术患者的预测评分与未再次手术的配对对照预测评分。结果表明,二次探查手术提高了卵巢癌的生存率,差异具有统计学意义。Z值为2.37,P值小于5%。[结论] 根据本研究,恶性卵巢肿瘤的治疗显示生存率提高了约20%,无论……(原文此处不完整)