论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨对局部晚期宫颈癌患者采用不同新辅助化疗方案做辅助治疗的临床效果。方法回顾性分析济源市人民医院2009年7月至2011年7月接受诊治的局部晚期宫颈癌患者80例,将其随机分成两组,分别为观察组40例,通过CBP方案作化疗;对照组40例,通过VBP方案化疗,治疗1~2个疗程后比较两组患者的治疗有效率,不良反应等情况。结果观察组患者的治疗有效患者为35例,总有效率为87.5%,对照组有效患者为37例,总有效率为92.5%,两组有效率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组患者出现的胃肠道及骨髓抑制不良反应较对照组较小,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论两组方案均能有效辅助治疗,提高患者生存率,但CBP方案不良反应小,利于体质较差患者。
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with different neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Methods A retrospective analysis of Jiyuan City People’s Hospital from July 2009 to July 2011 80 cases of locally advanced cervical cancer patients were treated, were randomly divided into two groups were observed in 40 cases, through the CBP regimen for chemotherapy; control group Forty cases were treated with VBP regimen, and the treatment efficiency and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared after treatment for 1-2 cycles. Results The effective rate of observation group was 35 cases, the total effective rate was 87.5%, the effective rate of control group was 37 cases, the total effective rate was 92.5%. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Patients in the observation group showed less gastrointestinal and bone marrow suppression adverse reactions than the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). Conclusion Both of the two regimens are effective in adjuvant therapy and improve the survival rate of patients. However, the adverse reactions of CBP regimen are small, favoring patients with poor constitution.