论文部分内容阅读
目的 :探讨TAC、TEC两种新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效。方法 :在2015年2月—2016年2月选取来我院进行乳腺癌的患者88例作为此次研究对象,将其分成两组,每组患者均44例。一组采用TAC方案新辅助化疗,另一组采用TEC方案新辅助化疗,对比两组患者的肿瘤变化及不良反应发生情况。结果 :TAC组化疗前有41例淋巴结转移的患者在新辅助化疗后有30例(73.17%)淋巴结转阴,TEC组40例淋巴结转移患者在新辅助治疗后31例(77.50%)淋巴结转阴。在新辅助化疗后4个星期对患者进行乳腺癌根治手术或者改良根治手术,手术的切除率均达到100%。TEC组的不良反应发生率(68.18%)明显高于TAC组(43.18%),两组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。差异无统计学意义。结论 :TAC、TEC方案新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效显著,相比之下采用TAC方案比TEC反应发生率低,更值得在临床上应用并推广。
Objective: To investigate the efficacy of TAC and TEC in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Methods: From February 2015 to February 2016, 88 patients selected for breast cancer in our hospital were selected as the study subjects and divided into two groups, 44 patients in each group. One group adopted neoadjuvant chemotherapy with TAC regimen and the other with neoadjuvant chemotherapy with TEC regimen. The changes of tumor and adverse reactions in the two groups were compared. Results: Thirty-one patients (73.17%) had lymph node metastasis in 41 patients with lymph node metastasis before chemotherapy in TAC group, and 31 patients (77.50%) in TEC group had lymph node metastasis in 40 patients with lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. . Four weeks after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for radical mastectomy or modified radical mastectomy surgery, surgical resection rates were 100%. The incidence of adverse reactions in TEC group (68.18%) was significantly higher than that in TAC group (43.18%). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P <0.05). The difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: TAC and TEC regimens have a significant effect on neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Compared with TAC, the TAC regimen has a lower incidence of breast cancer and is worthy of clinical application and promotion.