CEA与EAP方案治疗非小细胞肺癌疗效比较  

Comparative Study of CEA and EAP Regimens in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

作　　者：苏德华[1] 吕霞[1] 陈建祥[1] 何艳玲[1] 

机构地区：[1]江西省肿瘤医院

出　　处：《实用癌症杂志》1995年第4期271-272,共2页The Practical Journal of Cancer

摘　　要：在卡铂Ⅱ～Ⅲ期临床试验中，用ＣＥＡ（ＣＢＰ、ＶＰ１６、ＡＤＭ）和ＥＡＰ（ＶＰ１６、ＡＤＭ、ＤＤＰ）方案治疗非小细胞肺癌５５例，其中首治４１例，复治１４例。ＥＡＰ组常规加用地塞米松和灭吐灵防治呕吐。结果：ＣＥＡ组３１例有效率（ＣＲ＋ＰＲ）３２．２％，１年生存率３８．７％；ＥＡＰ组２４例，有效率３３．３％，１年生存率３３．３％。两组疗效无显著差异（Ｐ＞０．０５），血液毒性和呕吐发生率两组无显著差异（Ｐ＞０．０５）。In phaseⅡand Ⅲ clinica1 trials of carboplatin, 55 non-small cell lung cancer patients were treated with CEAregimen(CBP VP16 ADM)and EAP regimen(VP16 ADM DDP)mong them 4l patients were first treated,14 patients hadbeen previously treated.To prevent emesis,dexamethasone and paspertin were given routinely in EAP group. Results:in theCEA group of 31 patients the overall response rate(CR+PR) was 32.2%,one year survival rate was 38.7%. In the EAPgroup of 24 patients,the overall response rate(CR+PR)was 33.3%,one year survival rate was 33.3%. There is no signifi-cant difference between CEA and EAP groups in therapeutic effect,incidence rate of emesis and hematologic toxicity(P>0.05).

关 键 词：非小细胞性 肺肿瘤 药物疗法 CEA方案 EAP方案 

分 类 号：R734.205[医药卫生—肿瘤] R979.1[医药卫生—临床医学]