论文部分内容阅读
Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of paclitaxel-etoposide-carboplatin/cisplatin(TEP/TCE) regimen with those of etoposide-carboplatin/cisplatin(EP/CE) regimen as first-line treatment for combined small-cell lung cancer(CSCLC).Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 62 CSCLC patients who were treated at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from July 2000 to April 2013 and administered with TEP/TCE regimen(n=19) or EP/CE regimen(n=43) as first-line CSCLC treatment. All patients received more than two cycles of chemotherapy, and the response was evaluated every two cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival(OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival(PFS), objective response rate(ORR), disease control rate(DCR), and adverse effects. Results: ORR between the TEP/TCE and EP/CE groups showed a statistical difference(90% vs. 53%, P=0.033). Both groups failed to reach a statistical difference in DCR(100% vs. 86%, P=0.212). The median PFS and OS of the TEP/TCE group were slightly longer than those of the EP/CE group, although both groups failed to reach a statistical difference(10.5 vs. 8.9 months, P=0.484; 24.0 vs. 17.5 months, P=0.457). However, stratified analysis indicated that the PFS of patients with stages III and IV CSCLC showed marginally significant difference between the TEP/TCE and EP/CE groups(19.5 vs. 7.6 months; P=0.071). Both rates of grade IV bone marrow depression and termination of chemotherapy in the TEP/TCE group were significantly higher than those in the EP/CE group(26.3% vs. 7.0%, P=0.036; 31.6% vs. 14.7%, P=0.004). Conclusion: The TEP/TCE regimen may not be preferred for CSCLC, and this three-drug regimen requires further exploration and research. To date, the EP/CE regimen remains the standard treatment for CSCLC patients.
Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of paclitaxel-etoposide-carboplatin / cisplatin (TEP / TCE) regimen with those of etoposide-carboplatin / cisplatin (EP / CE) regimen as first-line treatment for combined small-cell lung cancer CSCLC). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 62 CSCLC patients who were treated at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from July 2000 to April 2013 and administered with TEP / TCE regimen (n = 19) or EP / CE regimen = 43) as first-line CSCLC treatment. All patients received more than two cycles of chemotherapy, and the response was evaluated every two cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival Results: ORR between the TEP / TCE and EP / CE groups showed a statistical difference (90% vs. 53%, P = 0.033). Both groups failed to reach a statistical difference in DCR (100% vs. 86%, P = 0.21 2). The median PFS and OS of the TEP / TCE group were slightly longer than those of the EP / CE group, although both groups were unable to reach a statistical difference (10.5 vs. 8.9 months, P = 0.484; 24.0 vs. 17.5 months, P = 0.457). However, stratified analysis indicated that the PFS of patients with stages III and IV CSCLC showed marginally significant difference between the TEP / TCE and EP / CE groups (19.5 vs. 7.6 months; P = 0.071) rates of grade IV bone marrow depression and termination of chemotherapy in the TEP / TCE group were significantly higher than those in the EP / CE group (26.3% vs. 7.0%, P = 0.036; 31.6% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.004 Conclusion: The TEP / TCE regimen may not be preferred for CSCLC, and this three-drug regimen requires further exploration and research. To date, the EP / CE regimen remains the standard treatment for CSCLC patients.