论文部分内容阅读
目的观察长春瑞滨、异环磷酰胺(IFO)分别与依托泊苷(VP16)、卡铂(CBP)联合应用治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)。方法将60例晚期NSCLC患者随机编入两组(单数为IEC组,双数为NEC组)。NEC组给予NVB25mg/m2静脉滴注,第1,8天;CBP300mg/m2静脉滴注,第1天;VP16130mg/m2静脉滴注,第1～3天;28d为1周期。IEC组给予IFO1.5g/m2静脉滴注,第1￣3天[同时用美司纳(Mesna)],CBP和VP16给药剂量与NEC方案相同。结果NEC组总有效率47%,IEC组总有效率33%。两组疗效的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。毒副反应两组间各项指标无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论NEC方案治疗晚期NSCLC有效率略高于IEC方案。两组方案之间的主要毒副反应差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。
Objective To observe the combination of vinorelbine, ifosfamide (IFO) with etoposide (VP16) and carboplatin (CBP) in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Sixty patients with advanced NSCLC were randomly divided into two groups (single IEC group and double NEC group). NEC group was given NVB25mg / m2 intravenous drip, the first and eighth days; CBP300mg / m2 intravenous drip, the first day; VP16130mg / m2 intravenous drip, the first to third days; 28d for a cycle. IEC group given IFO1.5g / m2 intravenous drip, the first ~ 3 days [at the same time with Mesna], CBP and VP16 dose and NEC program the same dose. Results The total effective rate was 47% in NEC group and 33% in IEC group. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P <0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the side effects (P> 0.05). Conclusion The effective rate of NEC regimen in treating advanced NSCLC is slightly higher than that of IEC regimen. There was no significant difference in the main toxicities between the two groups (P> 0.05).