论文部分内容阅读
目的：对晚期前列腺癌内分泌治疗药物临床效果进行观察和分析。方法：选择90例于2012年1月至2013年7月之间在我院进行晚期前列腺治疗的患者资料进行研究与分析，将患者分为对照组、治疗组和观察组三组，每组各有30例患者，对全部患者行黄体生成素释放激素类似物（LHRHa）皮下注射去势，然后对对照组30例患者进行单纯睾丸切除治疗；对治疗组30例患者进行氟他胺间歇性内分泌治疗；对观察组30例患者进行比卡鲁胺间歇性内分泌治疗，比较和分析三组患者的治疗效果。结果：治疗组与观察组患者治疗效果明显优于对照组，治疗组与观察组患者血清PSA值明显低于对照组，对照组患者的生化复发率、客观进展率以及病死率明显高于治疗组和观察组患者，治疗组与观察组治疗效果、血清PSA值、生化复发率、客观进展率以及病死率差异不具有统计学意义（P>0.05）。治疗前后三组患者前列腺体积差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05），治疗后三组患者前列腺体积差异不具有统计学意义（P>0.05）。对照组患者不良反应发生率明显低于治疗组和观察组，治疗组患者不良反应发生率高于观察组患者。结论：对晚期前列腺癌患者进行比卡鲁胺和氟他胺治疗均能够取得理想的治疗效果，但是比卡鲁胺更加安全可靠。
Objective: To observe and analyze the clinical effect of endocrine therapy for advanced prostate cancer. Methods: 90 patients with advanced prostate cancer treated in our hospital from January 2012 to July 2013 were selected and analyzed. The patients were divided into three groups: control group, treatment group and observation group Thirty patients underwent subcutaneous injection of LHRH for all patients, followed by a simple orchidectomy on 30 patients in the control group. In the 30 patients in the treatment group, intermittent endocrine of flutamide The patients in the observation group were given bicalutamide intermittent endocrine therapy. The therapeutic effects of the three groups were compared and analyzed. Results: The therapeutic effect of treatment group and observation group was better than that of control group. The serum PSA level of treatment group and observation group was significantly lower than that of control group. The biochemical recurrence rate, objective progress rate and mortality in control group were significantly higher than those in treatment group There was no significant difference in therapeutic effect, serum PSA, biochemical recurrence rate, objective progress rate and case fatality rate in observation group, treatment group and observation group (P> 0.05). There was a significant difference in prostate volume between the three groups before and after treatment (P & lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in prostate volume between the three groups after treatment (P & gt; 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the control group was significantly lower than that in the treatment group and the observation group. The incidence of adverse reactions in the treatment group was higher than that in the observation group. CONCLUSION: Bicalutamide and flutamide are effective in patients with advanced prostate cancer, but they are more safe and reliable than bicalutamide.