目的 观察多西他赛三药及两药联合对胃癌根治术后辅助化学疗法（化疗）的疗效比较及不良反应。 方法 回顾性分析解放军总医院2006年1月－2011年12月42 例胃癌根治术后患者的临床资料，其中有22例、20例患者分别接受以多西他赛为基础的三药、两药联合辅助化疗。三药联合：多西他赛注射液+铂类+氟尿嘧啶/卡培他滨片/替吉奥；两药联合：多西他赛注射液+氟尿嘧啶/卡培他滨片/替加氟或多西他赛注射液+铂类；主要观察终点：无疾病生存期（DFS），次要观察终点：预后因素分析、复发转移情况、不良反应及亚组分析。 结果 两组中位DFS分别为9.530、7.170个月（P=0.646）；性别、年龄、肿瘤浸润深度、脉管癌栓、淋巴结清扫范围是患者早期复发转移的不良预后因素，三药联合组肝转移率高于两药联合组（P=0.008）；主要不良反应为恶心、呕吐、白细胞减少、腹泻、脱发、血小板减少等，多为1～2级，可耐受，三药联合组较两药联合组易出现不良反应（P=0.011），以恶心、呕吐为主。 结论 胃癌根治术后以多西他赛为基础的辅助化疗三药、两药联合对患者疗效及预后无明显差异，且两种辅助疗法不良反应基本可耐受。
目的:评价多西他赛(D)联合拓扑替康(T)治疗晚期胃癌的临床疗效和毒性反应。方法:用DT方案治疗晚期胃痛患者47例。结果:可评价疗效者47例,完全缓解(CR)4例,占8.5％:部分缓解(PR)28例,占59.6％:稳定(SD)11例．占23.4％:进展(PD)4例,占8.5％。总有效率:(CR+PR)为68.1％,临床获益率(CR+PR+SD)为91.5％。中位肿瘤进展期(TTP)8.4个月,中位生存期(MST)12.8个月。主要不良反应为骨髓抑制、白细胞减少、胃肠道反应、恶心呕吐、腹泻、口腔粘膜炎,无治疗相关性死亡病例。结论:多西他赛联合拓扑替康治疗晚期胃癌临床缓解率颇高,提高了生存质量,不良反应可耐受,患者治疗依从性好,可以作为晚期胃癌一线治疗方案。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of docetaxel (DOC) combined with oxaliplatin (OXA) regimen in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. MethodsSixty patients with advanced gastric cancer treated in our hospital from January 2008 to January 2011 were randomly divided into two groups. The treatment group (n=30) was given DOC combined with OXA regimen. Patients in this group were treated with DOC 75 mg/m2, ivgtt, d1; OXA 130 mg/m2, ivgtt, d4; with 21 days as a cycle. The control group (n=30) was given DCF regimen. Patients in the control group were treated with DOC 75 mg/m2, ivgtt, d1; cisplatin 75 mg/m2, ivgtt, d1; calcium folinate 200/m2, ivgtt, 2 h, d1-2; fluorouracil 400 mg/m2, bolus 10 minutes, fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 civ 22 h d1-2; also with 21 days as a cycle. All patients received two cycles of chemotherapy at least. The effective rate (complete remission+partial remission), adverse reactions, median survival time and quality of life were analyzed and compared between the two groups. ResultsThe effective rates in the treatment group and the control group were 60.0% and 46.7% respectively, showing a non-significant difference (P>0.05). The appetite increasing rate (70.0% vs 43.3%), the weight gain rate (60.0% vs 33.3%), and the Karnofsky score improvement rate (63.3% vs 30.0%) of the treatment group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The adverse reactions were fewer in the treatment group, and most of them were between grade Ⅰ and Ⅱ. The median time of disease progression (5.8 months vs 5.6 months) and the median survival period (11.8 months vs 9.2 months) of the treatment group were longer than those in the control group. ConclusionDOC combined with OXA regimen is effective in treating advanced gastric cancer. It can significantly improve the quality of life of the patients, and it has fewer adverse reactions. Meanwhile, the median survival period is prolonged. DOC combined with OXA regimen is worth to be applied in clinic.
ObjectiveTo expolre the effect and safety of gemcitabine combined with docetaxel in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. MethodsForty-eight breast cancer patients who got treatment by gemcitabine combined with docetaxel from March 2013 to March 2014 were prospectively enrolled in this study. ResultsOf all the 48 patients, the completely responded (CR) rate was 16.7%(8/48), partial responded (PR) rate was 35.4%(17/48), stable disease (SD) rate was 33.3% (16/48), progressive disease (PD) rate was 14.6% (7/48), and the response rate was 52.1% (25/48), the clinical benefit rate was 85.4% (41/48). The response rates of hormone receptor (HR)-positive group, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2)-positive group, and Basal-like group were 43.5% (10/23), 54.5% (6/11), and 64.3% (9/14) respectively, the clinical benefit rates of HR-positive group, HER-2-positive group, and Basal-like group were 82.6% (19/23), 81.8% (9/11), and 92.9% (13/14) respectively. There was no significant difference among the 3 groups in the effect, response rate, and clinical benefit rate (P=0.293, P=0.462, P=0.663). All patients suffered from varying degrees of toxicities during chemotherapy, including leukopenia, neutropenia, decreased hemoglobin, thrombocytopenia, rash, nausea, vomiting, hair loss, diarrhea, fatigue, and elevated alanine aminotransferase, wherein leukopenia (27.1%, 13/48), neutropenia (22.9%, 11/48), thrombocytopenia (4.2%, 2/48), and fatigue (10.4%, 5/48) were included inⅢ-Ⅳ degree of adverse reactions. In addition, all of 48 patients were followed-up for 1-19 months, with a median follow-up time of 12 months. During follow-up period, 6 patients died, and the overall survival rate was 87.5% (42/48). There was no significant difference among the 3 groups in overall survival and progression free survival (P > 0.050). ConclusionGemcitabine combined with docetaxel may be an effective therapy in treatment of advanced breast cancer.
ObjectiveTo systematically review efficacy and safety of docetaxel chemotherapy combine with 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) in treatment of esophageal cancer.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI and WanFang Data were searched from inception to February 2017 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized control trials (qRCTs) about docetaxel chemotherapy combine with 3D-CRT in treatment of esophageal cancer. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 12.0 software.ResultsA total of 17 RCTs involving 1 353 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with the radiotherapy alone, the docetaxel chemotherapy combine with 3D-CRT could improve effective rate (OR=1.25, 95%CI 1.07 to 1.47, P=0.003), 3-year survival rate (OR=1.91, 95%CI 1.19 to 3.06, P=0.006), but there were no significant differences in 1-year survival rate (OR=1.28, 95%CI 0.95 to 1.72, P=0.105), hematologic toxicities (OR=1.13, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.49, P=0.389) and gastrointestinal reactions (OR=1.19, 95%CI 0.90 to 1.57, P=0.181).ConclusionsCompared with radiotherapy alone, docetaxel chemotherapy combine with 3D-CRT can improve the effective rate, 3-year survival rate, but not increase the incidences of adverse effects. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
Objectives To systematically review the efficacy and safety of docetaxel or epirubicin based regimens in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Methods We searched EMbase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data from inception to March 2017, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on docetaxel or epirubicin based regimens in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 12 RCTs involving 984 advanced gastric cancer patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that docetaxel based regimens were superior to epirubicin based regimens in ORR (RR=1.21, 95%CI 1.02 to 1.43, P=0.03), DCR (RR=1.13, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.26, P=0.03), 1-year survival rate (RR=1.26, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.56, P=0.04) and 2-year survival rate (RR=3.03, 95%CI 1.59 to 5.75, P=0.000 7), while there was no statistical difference between two groups in the incidence of grade Ⅲ to Ⅳ adverse events. The results of sensitivity analysis showed that docetaxel based regimens were superior to epirubicin based regimens in 2-year survival rate (RR=2.56, 95%CI 1.06 to 6.19, P=0.04), but there were no statistical differences in ORR (RR=1.13, 95%CI 0.88 to 1.45, P=0.34), DCR (RR=1.02, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.21, P=0.84) and 1-year survival rate (RR=1.29, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.80, P=0.14). The results of sensitivity analysis indicated that the overall outcomes might be affected by the risk bias of included studies. The comparision between docetaxel based regimens and epirubicin based regimens was consistent with the overall outcomes in the incidence of grade Ⅲ to Ⅳ adverse events. Conclusions Compared with epirubicin based regimens, docetaxel based regimens may have more clinical benefits for advanced gastric cancer patients. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.
Objective To investigate the efficacy of Docetaxel injection and Capecitabine tablets combined with Oxaliplatin injection in chemotherapy for patients after esophageal cancer surgery. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 101 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent radical surgery from June 2010 to December 2012, including 58 males and 43 females. According to the different treatment methods they were divided into a study group (58 patients, 32 males and 26 females, postoperatively receiving Docetaxel injection, Capecitabine tablets, Oxaliplatin injection and chemotherapy) and a control group (43 patients, 26 males and 17 females, taking Docetaxel injection and Capecitabine tablets for 4 consecutive courses). We compared the difference in the outcomes between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in the level of serum anticancer antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), carbohydrate antigen 199 (CA199) and squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC) before chemotherapy between two groups (P>0.05). After chemotherapy, the level of serum CEA, CA125, CA199, SCC in the study group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). The 1-year survival rate of the study group was 92.59% and the 2-year survival rate was 70.37%, which were not significantly different from those of the control group (P>0.05). The 3-year survival rate of the study group was significantly higher than that of the control group (57.41 %vs. 32.43%, P<0.05). The mean survival time of the study group was longer than that of the control group (31 monthsvs. 22 months, P=0.001). Conclusion Docetaxel injection and Capecitabine tablets combined with Oxaliplatin injection for the treatment of esophageal cancer surgery can significantly reduce levels of tumor markers in serum after esophageal cancer surgery, and is favorable for the long-term survival of patients, but adverse reactions should be noted.