Brun B, Mazeron J J, Martin M, Lelièvre G, Langlois A, Feuillade F, Lebourgeois J P, Peynegre R, Grellet M, Pierquin B
Bull Cancer. 1984;71(1):30-4.
Before loco regional treatment for head and neck cancer forty eight patients received one or the other of the following combined chemotherapy regimens: Regimen A (28 patients): high dosage methotrexate, bleomycin, cis-platin; regimen B (20 patients): common dosage methotrexate, bleomycin, hydroxyurea, vincristin. The effectiveness of regimen A seemed better than that of regimen B (46% responses versus 20%). This assessment must be accepted with caution, since, although the organization of treatment was strictly similar in the two groups, the study was not randomized, and there were noticeable differences between the two groups. Regimen B was associated with no toxicity. Regimen A was responsible for two fatalities. These two cases were linked to high dosage methotrexate. However, a combined chemotherapy regimen of type A with the high dosage methotrexate replaced by intermediate dosage methotrexate, seems feasible to us. Loco regional treatment was not impaired by initial chemotherapy with either regimen.
在对头颈部癌进行局部区域治疗之前,48例患者接受了以下联合化疗方案中的一种:方案A(28例患者):高剂量甲氨蝶呤、博来霉素、顺铂;方案B(20例患者):常规剂量甲氨蝶呤、博来霉素、羟基脲、长春新碱。方案A的有效性似乎优于方案B(缓解率分别为46%和20%)。由于尽管两组的治疗安排严格相似,但该研究并非随机研究,且两组之间存在显著差异,因此对这一评估必须谨慎接受。方案B无毒性。方案A导致两例死亡。这两例与高剂量甲氨蝶呤有关。然而,对我们来说,将方案A中的高剂量甲氨蝶呤替换为中等剂量甲氨蝶呤的联合化疗方案似乎是可行的。局部区域治疗未因两种方案中的任何一种初始化疗而受到影响。