论文部分内容阅读
目的回顾性研究美罗华联合CHOP(R-CHOP)方案和依托泊苷联合CHOP(E-CHOP)方案治疗弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)的疗效、生存率和不良反应。方法采用同期(2008年1月至2013年3月)非随机对照方法,将中国医科大学附属盛京医院收治的72例DLBCL患者分为2组,R-CHOP组37例,E-CHOP组35例,比较两组患者的疗效、生存率、无进展生存率及不良反应。结果 R-CHOP组患者完全缓解(CR)22例,部分缓解(PR)11例,总有效率(ORR)为89.2%(33/37);E-CHOP组CR11例,PR13例,ORR为68.6%(24/35),2组疗效比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.031);R-CHOP组和E-CHOP组1年总生存率分别为97.3%和94.3%,差异无统计学意义(P=0.609),1年无进展生存率分别为94.6%和74.3%,差异具有统计学意义(P=0.017)。两组患者的不良反应主要为胃肠道反应、轻中度骨髓抑制和输液相关不良反应,不良反应发生率相近,分别为37.8%和37.1%,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 R-CHOP方案能够提高治疗DLBCL患者的疗效,而不良反应未见明显增加,可作为该病治疗的一线方案。
Objective To retrospectively study the curative effect, survival rate and adverse reactions of rituximab combined with CHOP (R-CHOP) and etoposide combined with CHOP (E-CHOP) in the treatment of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods 72 patients with DLBCL admitted to Shengjing Hospital affiliated to China Medical University were randomly divided into two groups: 37 in R-CHOP group, 35 in E-CHOP group and 35 in non-randomized control group during the same period (January 2008 to March 2013) Cases, the efficacy of the two groups were compared, survival, progression-free survival and adverse reactions. Results In the R-CHOP group, 22 cases were completely relieved (CR) and 11 cases were partially relieved (PR). The total effective rate (ORR) was 89.2% (33/37). E-CHOP group CR11 and PR 13 cases had ORR 68.6 % (24/35). There was significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.031). The 1-year overall survival rates of R-CHOP group and E-CHOP group were 97.3% and 94.3% respectively, with no significant difference P = 0.609). The one-year progression-free survival rates were 94.6% and 74.3%, respectively, with statistical significance (P = 0.017). Adverse reactions of the two groups were mainly gastrointestinal reactions, mild to moderate myelosuppression and infusion-related adverse reactions. The incidence of adverse reactions were similar in 37.8% and 37.1%, respectively, with no significant difference (P> 0.05). Conclusions The R-CHOP regimen can improve the curative effect of treating DLBCL patients, but no obvious increase of adverse reactions can be used as the first-line treatment of the disease.