Yao Difei, Shen Hong, Huang Jianjin, Yuan Ying, Dai Haibin
Department of Pharmacy Department of Oncology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Aug;97(32):e11822. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011822.
Continuous endovenous administration of Endostar (CE) gradually replaced drip intravenous administration of Endostar (DE) in lung squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) treatment presently, but the efficacy and safety of CE and DE which is better in advanced lung SCC are yet unclear. To evaluate the feasibility of CE as an alternative to DE with gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy. Data were collected from patients admitted with locally advanced or metastatic lung SCC from January 2011 to April 2015, including the patients' characteristics, the therapeutic regimen, the treatment effectiveness, and toxicity. There are 71 patients with pathologically confirmed lung SCC retrospectively assigned to a treatment (CE) group of 48 patients and a control (DE) group of 23 patients. The response of each tumor to the therapy was assessed every 2 cycles by a chest and upper abdomen computed tomography for the comparison of curative effects and adverse reactions. Compared with the DE group, the response rate and disease control rate were noninferior in the CE group. The median progression-free survival and overall survival in the CE and DE groups were no significantly difference (5.5 vs 5.5 months, P = .141; 22.9 vs 14.3 months, P = .053). Increased progression-free survival (PFS) for patients in CE group was observed across 3 subgroups analyzed. There was a 35.7% reduction in the total dose of Endostar per cycle in the CE group compared with that in the DE group. Thus, in combination with GP chemotherapy, CE could be a suitable alternative to DE in locally advanced or metastatic SCC patients, resulting in less hemoptysis, less treatment time, and lower costs.
目前,在肺鳞状细胞癌(SCC)治疗中,恩度持续静脉给药(CE)逐渐取代了恩度静脉滴注给药(DE),但在晚期肺SCC中,CE和DE哪种疗效及安全性更佳尚不清楚。为评估CE替代DE联合吉西他滨/顺铂(GP)化疗的可行性。收集2011年1月至2015年4月收治的局部晚期或转移性肺SCC患者的数据,包括患者特征、治疗方案、治疗效果及毒性反应。71例经病理确诊的肺SCC患者回顾性分为治疗(CE)组48例和对照(DE)组23例。每2个周期通过胸部及上腹部计算机断层扫描评估各肿瘤对治疗的反应,以比较疗效及不良反应。与DE组相比,CE组的缓解率和疾病控制率不差。CE组和DE组的中位无进展生存期及总生存期无显著差异(5.5个月对5.5个月,P = 0.141;22.9个月对14.3个月,P = 0.053)。在分析的3个亚组中均观察到CE组患者的无进展生存期(PFS)增加。与DE组相比,CE组每个周期的恩度总剂量降低了35.7%。因此,在局部晚期或转移性SCC患者中,与GP化疗联合使用时,CE可能是DE的合适替代方案,可减少咯血、缩短治疗时间并降低成本。