多西他赛联用不同抗肿瘤药物用于乳腺癌的不良反应分析及临床用药评价

中华养生保健 ›› 2023, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (3): 45-48.

多西他赛联用不同抗肿瘤药物用于乳腺癌的不良反应分析及临床用药评价

黄晓婷¹, 郭岱年², 方翎¹, 张汉增^3,*

1.汕头大学医学院附属肿瘤医院药学部,广东汕头,515000;
2.汕头大学医学院附属肿瘤医院临床药物试验机构,广东汕头,515000;
3.汕头大学医学院附属肿瘤医院静配中心,广东汕头,515000

出版日期:2023-02-01 发布日期:2023-02-06
通讯作者: ^* 张汉增,E-mail：3238218317@qq.com。
作者简介:黄晓婷（1992—）,女,汉族,籍贯：广东省汕头市,本科,药师,研究方向：肿瘤药学。

Adverse Reaction Analysis and Clinical Evaluation of Docetaxel Combined with Different Antineoplastic Drugs in Breast Cancer

HUANG Xiao-ting¹, GUO Dai-nian², FANG Ling¹, ZHANG Han-zeng^3,*

1. Department of Pharmacy, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shantou University School of Medicine, Shantou Guangdong 515000, China;
2. Clinical Drug Trials, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shantou University School of Medicine, Shantou Guangdong, 515000, China;
3. Intravenous Center, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shantou University School of Medicine, Shantou Guangdong, 515000, China

Online:2023-02-01 Published:2023-02-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨多西他赛联用不同抗肿瘤药物用于乳腺癌的不良反应分析及临床用药评价。方法采用回顾性研究选取2020年3月—2021年3月在汕头大学医学院附属肿瘤医院就诊的78例乳腺癌患者,根据治疗方案不同分为三组,TH（多西他赛+曲妥珠单抗）组24例,TE（多西他赛+表柔比星）组25例,TEC（多西他赛+表柔比星+环磷酰胺）组29例。对比三组临床疗效、不良反应、血清生化指标和1年生存率。结果 TH组疗效显著高于TE组,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;TEC组疗效显著高于TE组,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;TH组和TEC组疗效比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。三组不良反应均为轻度,三组不良反应比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。三组可溶性自杀相关因子（sFas）水平和1年生存率比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,其中sFas水平两两组间比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,TEC组1年生存率显著高于TE组,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）,其余两两组间1年生存率比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。三组促卵泡生长激素（FSH）和雌二醇（E₂）比较,差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论多西他赛联合曲妥珠单抗与多西他赛联合表柔比星和环磷酰胺治疗乳腺癌效果和安全性相当,均优于多西他赛与表柔比星,且多西他赛联合表柔比星和环磷酰胺在抑制肿瘤细胞增殖方面效果最好,生存率高于多西他赛与表柔比星,临床中可根据患者情况酌情选择。

关键词: 乳腺癌, 多西他赛, 曲妥珠单抗, 表柔比星, 环磷酰胺

Abstract: Objective To investigate the adverse reaction analysis and clinical evaluation of docetaxel combined with different antineoplastic drugs in breast cancer. Methods A retrospective study was conducted to select 78 breast cancer patients from March 2020 to March 2021 in the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shantou University Medical College. According to different treatment schemes, they were divided into three groups: TH (Docetaxel+Trastuzumab) group with 24 cases, TE (Docetaxel+Epirubicin) group with 25 cases, and TEC (Docetaxel+Epirubicin+Cyclophosphamide) group with 29 cases. The clinical efficacy, adverse reactions, serum biochemical index and 1-year survival rate of the three groups were compared. Results The therapeutic of TH group was significantly higher than that of TE group (P<0.05); the therapeutic of TEC group was significantly higher than that of TE group (P<0.05); the difference of curative effect between TH group and TEC group was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The adverse reactions of the three groups were mild, and there was no significant difference among the three groups (P>0.05). Compared with the 1-year survival rate of the three groups, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), among which the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The 1-year survival rate of TEC group was significantly higher than that of TE group (P<0.05), but there was no statistical difference between the other two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in FSH and E₂ between the three groups (P>0.05). Conclusion The efficacy and safety of Docetaxel combined with Trastuzumab is similar to that of Docetaxel combined with Epirubicin and Cyclophosphamide in the treatment of breast cancer, both of which are superior to those of Docetaxel and Epirubicin. Moreover, Docetaxel combined with Epirubicin and Cyclophosphamide has the best effect in inhibiting tumor cell proliferation, and the survival rate is higher than that of Docetaxel and Epirubicin, which can be selected according to the patient's condition.

Key words: breast cancer, docetaxel, trastuzumab, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide

中图分类号:

R969

黄晓婷, 郭岱年, 方翎, 张汉增. 多西他赛联用不同抗肿瘤药物用于乳腺癌的不良反应分析及临床用药评价[J]. 中华养生保健, 2023, 41(3): 45-48.

HUANG Xiao-ting, GUO Dai-nian, FANG Ling, ZHANG Han-zeng. Adverse Reaction Analysis and Clinical Evaluation of Docetaxel Combined with Different Antineoplastic Drugs in Breast Cancer[J]. ZHONGHUA YANGSHENG BAOJIAN, 2023, 41(3): 45-48.

参考文献

[1] Siegel R L, Miller K D, Jemal A.Cancer statistics,2020[J]. CA Cancer J Clin,2020,70(1):7-30.
[2] Narayan A K, Lee C I, Lehman C D.Screening for Breast Cancer[J]. Med Clin North Am,2020,104(6):1007-1021.
[3] 商木岩,郭帅,张强,等.中国乳腺癌筛查现状[J].实用癌症杂志,2020,35(11):1911-1914.
[4] Shien T, Iwata H.Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer[J].Jpn J Clin Oncol,2020,50(3):225-229.
[5] 王嘉,修秉虬,郭瑢,等.中国乳腺癌新辅助治疗现状横断面调查[J].中华肿瘤杂志,2020, 42(11):931-936.
[6] 李晓琪,王鑫,姜廷军,等.蒽环类药物引发心脏毒性的相关机制研究进展[J].医学综述,2022,28(12):2332-2337.
[7] 薛云立,冯友成.曲妥珠单抗联合卡培他滨或含紫杉类方案治疗HER-2阳性晚期乳腺癌的效果分析[J].湖北民族大学学报(医学版),2022,39(2):61-65.
[8] 陈娟,蒋斌,黄果,等.乳腺癌新辅助化疗前后肿瘤相关巨噬细胞相关基因变化的生物信息学分析[J].中国普通外科杂志,2022,31(5):631-639.
[9] 国家肿瘤质控中心乳腺癌专家委员会,中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会,中国抗癌协会肿瘤药物临床研究专业委员会.中国晚期乳腺癌规范诊疗指南(2020版)[J].中华肿瘤杂志,2020,42(10):781-797.
[10] 谢秋. 乳腺癌术后辅助治疗研究进展[J].当代临床医刊,2022,35(3): 114-116.
[11] 何向明,杨红健.基于代谢组学预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效及预后的研究进展[J].肿瘤学杂志,2022,28(5):345-348.
[12] 张文静,郝志英,贾俊婷.多西他赛与紫杉醇药品不良反应真实世界数据及危险因素比较[J].中国药业,2022,31(10):60-64.
[13] 杨孟达,张鹏程,张迅,等.右丙亚胺对表柔比星方案化疗乳腺癌患者表柔比星心脏毒性的预防作用观察[J].山东医药,2022,62(15):38-43.
[14] 任晓菲,张香梅,李静平,等.不同新辅助治疗方案对403例乳腺癌患者HER2表达状态的影响[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志,2022,29(9):669-673.
[15] 王文玉,贾欢欢,聂健圳.曲妥珠单抗治疗晚期乳腺癌的应用效果与血清学指标观察[J].罕少疾病杂志,2022,29(6):46-48.
[16] 姚红民,张高宽,张盼盼,等.紫杉醇联合环磷酰胺与表柔比星治疗乳腺癌的临床疗效[J].癌症进展,2022,20(5):472-474,478.
[17] 朱小丽,吕琛,杜雪亭,等.曲妥珠单抗联合化疗致心脏毒性的影响因素分析[J].中国药房,2022,33(8):992-995.
[18] 李小峰,孙新宇,张慧.曲妥珠单抗联合紫杉醇和卡铂治疗人表皮生长因子受体-2阳性乳腺癌的疗效及其对心功能的影响[J].新乡医学院学报,2022,39(4):376-380,386.
[19] 郑颖娟,王辉,刘晓静,等.人参皂苷对Luminal型乳腺癌中Fas、FasL表达水平的影响[J].辽宁中医杂志,2020,47(10):185-189,226.
[20] 王志威,魏敏,王杰,等.TEC-NX方案与TEC方案在局部晚期乳腺癌辅助化疗中疗效和不良反应差异的比较[J].国际外科学杂志,2019, 46(5):325-329.