![肿瘤药物治疗方案及综合评价](https://wfqqreader-1252317822.image.myqcloud.com/cover/13/43604013/b_43604013.jpg)
HER2阴性晚期乳腺癌一线化疗方案
方案Ⅰ 单药化疗vs联合化疗
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T133_238_2353_1947_2718_91341.jpg?sign=1739136515-aTZewZLQWgEnivnlLl13JxPF5X7tgceY-0-c87f8ebb9f32eeac4032d348b29ad193)
*.疾病进展后分别交叉至对照组
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T134_290_290_2025_1162_148396.jpg?sign=1739136515-WGEX63tg1Ym5Rzwd0Se5iT4N4vp6Tc5Z-0-f74d31290e373a7b5b3526b3451db543)
点评
E1193研究为一项前瞻性的Ⅲ期随机对照研究,比较蒽环类药物和紫杉类药物联合给药或单药序贯给药对晚期乳腺癌的疗效。结果显示,蒽环联合紫杉醇化疗较蒽环或紫杉醇单药客观有效率和TTP时间有一定提高,但总生存和生活质量没有改善。基于本研究及其他类似研究的结果,目前对于转移性乳腺癌患者,尤其是肿瘤负荷低、发展慢、无症状的患者,常推荐单药化疗优先的原则。但对于肿瘤负荷重、进展迅速、症状明显继续退缩或控制肿瘤缓解症状且身体情况能够耐受的情况可选择联合化疗。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] SLEDGE GW,NEUBERG D,BERNARDO P,et al.PhaseⅢ trial of doxorubicin,paclitaxel,and the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel as front-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer:an intergroup trial(E1193).J Clin Oncol,2003,21(4):588-592.
方案Ⅱ GT方案vs紫杉醇单药
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T134_297_2440_2007_2752_91465.jpg?sign=1739136515-GFqMzql4dfT2gPJHs759RR0sDvpNsj9x-0-10783dbdf9706935e9e22fdba3777591)
方案评价
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T135_228_346_1966_2753_148400.jpg?sign=1739136515-ihTYBPSItEygOsHA2mdHMEXHme5rUD5a-0-6446d1a535361ba3c482fa79d6074362)
点评
本研究为一项Ⅲ期随机对照研究,入组患者为辅助治疗(包括新辅助)阶段接受过蒽环类药物化疗的患者,比较吉西他滨联合紫杉醇与单药紫杉醇的疗效。结果显示,联合化疗较单药化疗有效率增加,总生存期也有一定的获益。虽然联合化疗不良事件增加,包括3级以上粒细胞下降和2级以上的疲劳和神经毒性,但不良事件总体可控。因此,本研究结果证实了吉西他滨与紫杉醇联合的方案对晚期乳腺癌患者具有较好的疗效和耐受性,可作为一线方案推荐。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] ALBAIN KS,NAG SM,CALDERILLO-RUIZ G,et al.Gemcitabine plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline treatment.J Clin Oncol,2008,26(24):3950-3957.
方案Ⅲ AT方案vs AC方案
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T136_297_1466_2006_1832_91662.jpg?sign=1739136515-y6dfLCPnMtYFaowOsOyMtmMXHFWlFTrc-0-8d35e6c58c2fb96084fcbfa8d1054ca1)
方案评价
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T136_280_1932_2030_2819_148403.jpg?sign=1739136515-Y6RyKfjg8MtDPgKizlXUJfyThAPYIuHr-0-7dbfca9077c943a5e239b3025380e7f6)
续表
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T137_238_343_1952_1493_147978.jpg?sign=1739136515-S7EPnMgMzLU81dQ0RktlC3ujFQ4rKgnM-0-d54a5fcab4b3a890f48d6f250e1204ab)
点评
晚期乳腺癌一线AT方案和AC方案疗效相似。AT方案骨髓抑制反应更重,粒细胞缺少性发热的发生率显著高于AC方案。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] BIGANZOLI L,CUFER T,BRUNING P,et al.Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer:The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10961 Multicenter Phase Ⅲ Trial.J Clin Oncol,2002,20(14):3114-3121.
方案Ⅳ AT方案vs FAC方案
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T137_238_2452_1949_2834_91900.jpg?sign=1739136515-1hpzK1v3w5Gz8EayeDQJHLF2tZu6xXGd-0-886a47b488e314f586b1141637b1bd4e)
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T138_282_277_2043_2382_148407.jpg?sign=1739136515-1hz1RloRPcUhMkaocQqqRU9Blz2J64JR-0-c56afb979da5f0282ee8b66e4f931ff1)
点评
AT方案与FAC方案相比ORR,TTP 和OS均显著提高,但不良事件亦增加,主要包括3级以上的中性粒细胞减少,所有程度的肌肉关节痛、外周神经毒性和腹泻反应。调查问卷显示两种化疗方案对患者生活质量的影响无显著差别。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] JASSEM J,PIENÉ KOWSKI T,PLUZANÉSKA A,et al.Doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus fluorouracil,doxorubicin,and cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for women with metastatic breast cancer:final results of a randomized phase Ⅲ multicenter trial.J Clin Oncol:official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology,2001,19(6):1707-1715.
方案Ⅴ 含蒽环联合方案vs非含蒽环方案
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T139_238_869_1951_1293_92130.jpg?sign=1739136515-86vA2uo1BGpopN6KkmuGE5EyPNaXiPtl-0-13c4124f98e72edcae97f3dbfcbf2504)
方案评价
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T139_231_1396_1979_2807_148411.jpg?sign=1739136515-a8wUEc1LtZiWtrVeRR3meuvrECoNU9Ty-0-ce1fef37bf0041fc0a542ef92335774a)
续表
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T140_297_371_2010_1692_147981.jpg?sign=1739136515-dE5iF7ciHgGxjx0D4Sj0uCXUhV9m5lzF-0-9c7cb1d4fe03adf573f1a10b990af9a2)
点评
AGO Breast Cancer Study Group研究为一项Ⅲ期随机对照研究,旨在评估晚期乳腺癌一线使用非含蒽环的XP方案与蒽环类的EP方案,两个方案疗效没有差别,不良事件各异。XP方案腹泻和手足综合征的发生率更高,而EP方案血液学不良事件更严重。两个方案总的耐受性良好,生活质量方面没有差别。该研究结果提示非含蒽环的XP方案可以替代含蒽环方案作为晚期乳腺一线方案选择,尤其对于辅助化疗阶段使用过蒽环类药物的患者可能更为合适。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] LÜCK HJ,DU BOIS A,LOIBL S,et al.Capecitabine plus paclitaxel versus epirubicin plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer:efficacy and safety results of a randomized,phase Ⅲ trial by the AGO Breast Cancer Study Group.Breast Cancer Res Treat,2013,139(3):779-787.
方案Ⅵ 卡培他滨联合多西紫杉醇vs表柔比星联合多西紫杉醇
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T141_238_351_1950_716_92441.jpg?sign=1739136515-YFQs88OZiDEZmrO0xi0CtKeYD7DPwLeV-0-24d114fbd898e977081bc0bce6625218)
方案评价
![](https://epubservercos.yuewen.com/B8A9D8/22919013101368106/epubprivate/OEBPS/Images/T141_228_840_1964_2794_148417.jpg?sign=1739136515-krf0fMmmNUVLs1FHwEDOXdFf2grIkPOU-0-82d3c6cea47e54533c9343e3d69529ca)
点评
DE方案和DC方案疗效相似,不良事件各异。DE方案骨髓抑制发生率更高,DC方案手足综合征发生率更高。两个方案都可以作为晚期乳腺癌的一线治疗。
(安 欣 史艳侠)
参考文献
[1] MAVROUDIS D,PAPAKOTOULAS P,ARDAVANIS A,et al.Randomized phaseⅢ trial comparing docetaxel plus epirubicin versus docetaxel plus capecitabine as first-line treatment in women with advanced breast cancer.Ann Oncol,2010,21(1):48-54.