Liu Huilong, Liu Yanfang, Wang Li, Ruan Xinjian, Wang Fei, Xu Dandan, Zhang Jing, Jia Xiaoyan, Liu Duanqi
1 Department of Oncology, The PLA Army General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Jan 1;18:1533033819831989. doi: 10.1177/1533033819831989.
To analyze and study the short-term therapeutic effects and main adverse effects of 2 Porphyrin photosensitizer-mediated photodynamic therapy for esophageal cancer.
We apply the hematoporphyrin derivative and hematoporphyrin injection produced by different manufacturers at different periods as photosensitizers in therapy of 79 esophageal cancer cases, with the administration dosage of 5 mg/kg and intravenous drip 24 hours before irradiation. We apply the gold vapor laser and semiconductor laser, respectively, as treatment light source, with the power density of 100 to 300 mW/cm and energy density of 100 to 300 J/cm. After treatment for 1 to 4 sessions, we evaluate the short-term therapeutic effects as complete response, partial response, minor response, or no change, and then make comparative study on therapeutic effects and adverse effects.
There were 47 patients in hematoporphyrin derivative group, including 3 (6.4%) patients with complete response, 31 (66.0%) patients with partial response, 10 (21.3%) patients with minor response, and 3 (6.4%) patients with no change. The dysphagia score was reduced from 2.53 (1.16) before treatment to 1.32 (1.20; P < .01) after treatment. There were 32 patients in the hematoporphyrin injection group, including 3 (9.4%) patients with complete response, 19 (59.4%) patients with partial response, 6 (18.8%) patients with minor response, and 4 (12.5%) patients with no change. The dysphagia score was reduced from 2.41 (1.13) before treatment to 1.18 (0.99; P < .01) after treatment. The dysphagia scores of 2 groups after treatment were significantly reduced compared to those before treatment. Both groups did not display serious adverse effect.
Two porphyrin photosensitizers in treatment of esophageal cancer at different clinical stages all had good effect with similar therapeutic effect, mild adverse effect, and good tolerance, which implies it is a preferable palliative therapy means.
分析和研究两种卟啉光敏剂介导的光动力疗法治疗食管癌的短期疗效及主要不良反应。
应用不同厂家不同时期生产的血卟啉衍生物和血卟啉注射液作为光敏剂,对79例食管癌患者进行治疗,给药剂量为5mg/kg,于照射前24小时静脉滴注。分别应用金蒸汽激光和半导体激光作为治疗光源,功率密度为100~300mW/cm,能量密度为100~300J/cm。治疗1~4个疗程后,评价短期疗效为完全缓解、部分缓解、轻度缓解或无变化,然后对疗效和不良反应进行对比研究。
血卟啉衍生物组47例患者,完全缓解3例(6.4%),部分缓解31例(66.0%),轻度缓解10例(21.3%),无变化3例(6.4%)。吞咽困难评分从治疗前的2.53(1.16)降至治疗后的1.32(1.20;P<0.01)。血卟啉注射液组32例患者,完全缓解3例(9.4%),部分缓解19例(59.4%),轻度缓解6例(18.8%),无变化4例(12.5%)。吞咽困难评分从治疗前的2.41(1.13)降至治疗后的1.18(0.99;P<0.01)。两组治疗后的吞咽困难评分均较治疗前显著降低。两组均未出现严重不良反应。
两种卟啉光敏剂治疗不同临床分期的食管癌均有良好效果,疗效相似,不良反应轻微,耐受性良好,是一种较好的姑息治疗手段。