机构地区:[1]福建医科大学孟超肝胆医院肝胆外科,福州350001 [2]海军军医大学第三附属医院肝外三科,上海200433 [3]漳州市医院普通外科,漳州363000 [4]厦门市中医院肝胆胰外科,厦门361015 [5]福建医科大学附属第一医院介入科,福州350001 [6]福建省肿瘤医院肝胆胰外科,福州350001 [7]莆田学院附属医院肝胆外科,莆田351100 [8]厦门大学附属中山医院肝胆外科,厦门361004 [9]福建医科大学附属泉州第一医院肝胆外科,泉州362002 [10]福建医科大学孟超肝胆医院肝胆胰肿瘤综合治疗科,福州350001
出 处:《中华消化外科杂志》2024年第2期248-256,共9页Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery
基 金:国家自然科学基金(62275050);福建省科技创新联合资金项目(2019Y9108);福建省卫健委中青年科研重大项目(2021ZQNZD013)。
摘 要:目的探讨甲胎蛋白(AFP)反应评估酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs)联合程序性死亡受体1抑制剂(α‑PD‑1)治疗中晚期肝癌的抗肿瘤疗效以及预测患者预后的价值。方法采用回顾性队列研究方法。收集2020年3月至2022年7月福建医科大学孟超肝胆医院等我国9家医学中心收治的205例中晚期肝癌患者临床病理资料;男178例,女27例;年龄为(52±12)岁。基于治疗后6~8周AFP反应,将患者分为AFP反应(AFP水平与基线比较下降≥50%)和AFP无反应(AFP水平与基线比较下降<50%)。观察指标:(1)AFP反应评估抗肿瘤疗效。(2)患者预后比较。(3)患者预后影响因素分析。正态分布的计量资料以x±s表示。偏态分布的计量资料以M(范围)表示或M(Q1,Q3)表示。计数资料以绝对数表示,组间比较采用χ^(2)检验。Kaplan‑Meier法绘制生存曲线并计算生存率,采用Log‑Rank检验进行生存分析。单因素分析采用COX比例风险模型,多因素分析采用COX逐步回归。结果(1)AFP反应评估抗肿瘤疗效。205例肝癌患者治疗前AFP均为阳性,基线AFP水平为1560(219,3400)μg/L,均行TKIs联合α‑PD‑1治疗,治疗6~8周后AFP水平为776(66,2000)μg/L。205例患者治疗后,AFP反应88例,AFP无反应117例。参照实体瘤疗效评价标准1.1,AFP反应患者治疗后客观缓解率和疾病控制率分别为42.05%(37/88)和94.32%(83/88),AFP无反应患者上述指标分别为16.24%(19/117)和64.10%(75/117),两者上述指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(χ^(2)=16.846,25.950,P<0.05)。参照改良的实体瘤疗效评价标准,AFP反应患者治疗后客观缓解率和疾病控制率分别为69.32%(61/88)和94.32%(83/88),AFP无反应患者上述指标分别为33.33%(39/117)和64.10%(75/117),两者上述指标比较,差异均有统计学意义(χ^(2)=26.030,25.950,P<0.05)。(2)患者预后比较。205例患者治疗后均获得随访,随访时间为12.4(2.4~34.0)个月,中位无进展生存时间和总生存时间分别为5.5个月和17.8个Objective To investigate the evaluation efficacy and predictive prognostic value of alpha-fetoprotein(AFP)response in tyrosine kinase inhibitors(TKIs)in combination with PD-1 inhibitors(α-PD-1)for intermediate-to-advanced hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC).Methods The retrospective cohort study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 205 patients with intermediate-to-advanced HCC who were admitted to 9 medical centers,including Mengchao Hepatobiliary Hospital of Fujian Medical University et al,from March 2020 to July 2022 were collected.There were 178 males and 27 females,aged(52±12)years.Based on AFP response at 6−8 weeks after treatment,patients were divided into the AFP response group(AFP level decreased by≥50%compared to baseline)and the AFP no response group(AFP level decreased by<50%compared to baseline).Observation indicators:(1)AFP response evaluation of anti-tumor efficacy;(2)comparison of patient prognosis;(3)analysis of factors affecting patient prognosis.Measurement data with normal distrubution were represented as Mean±SD,and measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M(range)and M(Q1,Q3).Count data were described as absolute numbers,and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test.The Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw survival curve and calculate survival rate,and the Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis.The COX proportional risk model was used for univariate analysis and the COX stepwise regression model was used for multivariate analysis.Results(1)AFP response evaluation of anti-tumor efficacy.Before treatment,all 205 patients were positive of AFP,with a baseline AFP level of 1560(219,3400)μg/L.All 205 patients were treated with TKIs in combination withα-PD-1,and the AFP level was 776(66,2000)μg/L after 6 to 8 weeks of treatment.Of the 205 patients,88 cases were classified as AFP response and 117 cases were classified as AFP no response.According to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1,the objective response rate
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...