Suppr超能文献

喉癌诱导化疗后行放化疗或生物放疗。

Induction Chemotherapy Followed by either Chemoradiotherapy or Bioradiotherapy in Laryngeal Cancer.

机构信息

Neuroscience Research Center, Neuropharmacology Institute, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.

Department of Ear, Nose and Throat, Shafa Hospital, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.

出版信息

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2021 May 1;22(5):1633-1637. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.5.1633.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

In loco regionally advanced head and neck cancer, the superiority of concomitant cetuximab with radiation over radiation alone has been proven previously. But comparison between chemo radiation and bioradiation has not been well studied.

METHODS

Between October 2013 and August 2017, 38 patients with locoregionally advanced laryngeal cancer and more than 50% response to 3 cycles of  induction chemotherapy (docetaxel and cisplatin: both with a dose of 75 mg/m2 on the first day  and 5-flurouracil: 750 mg/m2 during  days 1to 3; repeated every 21 days) were selected to receive either carboplatin (18 patients, AUC 1.5 , weekly) or cetuximab (20 patients, with loading dose of 400 mg/m2 and weekly dose of  250 mg/m2) with radiation. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate progression free survival and overall survival rates. The log-rank test was used to compare overall survival between treatment groups.

RESULTS

The median follow up time was 36 months. The 2-year organ preservation rate of 78.9% was achieved. The 3- year progression-free survival rates of 65.2%, 72.7% and 58.2% were observed for all patients, carboplatin group and cetuximab group, respectively (p=0.4). The 3-year estimates of overall survival were 67.8%, 69.2 %, and 66.3 % for all patients, carboplatin group and cetuximab group, respectively (p=0.47). Concomitant carboplatin was discontinued in 3 patients due to toxicity Conclusion: Concomitant cetuximab is a reasonable alternative to concomitant chemotherapy. But the difference in treatment outcome between bioradiation and chemoradiation remains to be defined.
.

摘要

目的

在局部区域进展期头颈部癌中,先前已证明同时使用西妥昔单抗与放疗比单纯放疗更具优势。但化疗联合放疗与生物放疗的比较尚未得到很好的研究。
方法:在 2013 年 10 月至 2017 年 8 月期间,选择了 38 例局部区域晚期喉癌患者,这些患者对 3 个周期的诱导化疗(多西紫杉醇和顺铂:第一天均为 75mg/m2,5-氟尿嘧啶:第 1 至 3 天 750mg/m2;每 21 天重复一次)有超过 50%的反应,接受卡铂(18 例患者,AUC 1.5,每周)或西妥昔单抗(20 例患者,初始剂量为 400mg/m2,每周剂量为 250mg/m2)联合放疗。采用 Kaplan-Meier 分析计算无进展生存率和总生存率。对数秩检验用于比较治疗组之间的总生存率。
结果:中位随访时间为 36 个月。实现了 78.9%的 2 年器官保存率。所有患者、卡铂组和西妥昔单抗组的 3 年无进展生存率分别为 65.2%、72.7%和 58.2%(p=0.4)。所有患者、卡铂组和西妥昔单抗组的 3 年总生存率估计分别为 67.8%、69.2%和 66.3%(p=0.47)。由于毒性,有 3 例患者停止了同期卡铂治疗。
结论:同时使用西妥昔单抗是同时化疗的合理替代方案。但是生物放疗与化疗联合放疗的治疗效果差异仍有待确定。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4e6b/8408382/cf1b4ce71129/APJCP-22-1633-g001.jpg

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