论文部分内容阅读
目的 对两种方案的治疗有效率、不良反应等进行对比研究。方法 以阿霉素为界,将化疗分为含与不含阿霉家药物的两大类,通过回顾性研究进行比较,即CA(E)F方案和CMF方案,CA(E)F组CR+PR为62.75％(32/51),CMF组CR+PR为56.00％(14/25)。结果 两组有效率无显著差异(P>0.05),在不良反应方面,CA(E)F组稍高于CMF组,但经统计学处理亦无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论 此两种方案皆为治疗晚期乳癌的一线标准方案。
Objective To compare the efficacy and adverse reactions of the two regimens. METHODS: Doxorubicin was used as the boundary, and chemotherapy was divided into two categories with and without Rhizoma homeopathies. Comparisons were performed through retrospective studies: CA(E)F and CMF regimens, and CA(E)F group CR. The +PR was 62.75% (32/51), and the CMF group CR+PR was 56.00% (14/25). Results There was no significant difference in efficacy between the two groups (P>0.05). In adverse reactions, the CA(E)F group was slightly higher than the CMF group, but there was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion Both of these regimens are the first-line standard regimens for the treatment of advanced breast cancer.