论文部分内容阅读
:[目的]比较MVP与CFP方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和毒性。[方法]统计分析用MVP(丝裂霉素、长春地辛、顺铂)方案及CFP(环磷酰胺、氟尿嘧啶脱氧核苷、顺铂)方案治疗的105例晚期非小细胞肺癌病例的临床资料。[结果]MVP组有效率50 9%(27/53) ,CFP组有效率48 1%(25/52) ,无统计学差异。毒副反应主要为骨髓抑制(以白细胞下降明显) ,MVP组白细胞下降占62 5%(33/53) ,CFP组占36 5%(19/52) ,前者较后者更为严重 ,有统计学差异(P<0 01)。[结论]MVP方案和CFP方案为治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的有效方案 ,而CFP方案骨髓抑制较MVP方案轻 ,更为理想。
: [Objective] To compare the efficacy and toxicity of MVP and CFP regimens in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. [Methods] The clinical data of 105 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with MVP (mitomycin, vindesine, cisplatin) regimen and CFP (cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil, cisplatin) regimen were statistically analyzed. . [Results] The efficiency of MVP group was 50 9% (27/53), and the efficiency of CFP group was 48 1% (25/52). There was no statistical difference. The toxic side effects were mainly myelosuppression (marked by a decrease in white blood cells). The decrease of white blood cells in the MVP group accounted for 62 5% (33/53), and the CFP group accounted for 36 5% (19/52). The former was more severe than the latter and there were statistics. Differences in learning (P<0 01). [Conclusion] The MVP regimen and CFP regimen are effective regimens for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, and the CFP regimen is more ideal than the MVP regimen.