Effect of docetaxel combined with endocrine therapy on the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer patients
-
摘要: 目的:探讨间歇性多西他赛联合内分泌疗法治疗去势抵抗性前列腺癌(CRPC)患者的效果。方法:选取102例CRPC患者作为研究对象,选取时间为2017年5月—2019年5月,按照类层抽样法分为单药1组(予以多西他赛治疗)、单药2组(予以内分泌疗法)、联合用药组(间歇性多西他赛联合内分泌疗法治疗),各34例;对比缓解率,评估治疗前、治疗后3、6个周期的血清总前列腺特异抗原(tPSA)、游离前列腺特异抗原(fPSA)表达量,观察毒副作用,以及PFS、病死率。结果:广义估计方程分析结果显示:组间方面,重复测量结果显示,三组有效率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);时点方面显示,不同时点下患者缓解率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。重复测量方差分析显示,三组tPSA的时点、组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),而交互比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);三组fPSA的时点、组间、交互比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。简单效应LSD-t成对比较显示,治疗前,两组tPSA、fPSA比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);治疗后3、6个周期,联合用药组tPSA、fPSA低于单药1组、单药2组(P<0.01)。三组的恶心呕吐、周围神经炎、肝肾功能损害、骨髓抑制等发生率比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);其中,联合用药组的恶心呕吐、周围神经炎及骨髓抑制等发生率低于单药1组(P<0.05);联合用药组血小板下降、贫血、肝肾功能损伤等发生率低于单药1组,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);联合用药组的恶心呕吐、周围神经炎、骨髓抑制、血小板下降、贫血、肝肾功能损伤等发生率与单药2组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);单药2组的恶心呕吐、周围神经炎、骨髓抑制、血小板下降、贫血、肝肾功能损伤等发生率低于单药1组。联合用药组无进展生存期明显长于单药1组、单药2组(P<0.05),而病死率明显低于单药1组(P<0.05);联合用药组的病死率与单药2组比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:多西他赛联合内分泌疗法治疗CRPC效果显著,能较好地控制病情发展,且安全性高,无严重毒副作用。Abstract: Objective: To investigate the effect of intermittent docetaxel combined with endocrine therapy in the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer(CRPC) patients.Methods: A total of 102 CRPC patients were selected as the research object, and the selection period was from May 2017 to May 2019. According to the stratified sampling method, they were averagely divided into single-agent 1 group(treated with docetaxel) and single-drug group 2(treated with endocrine therapy) and combined medication group(intermittent docetaxel combined with endocrine therapy). The remission rate was compared among three groups. The serum total prostate specific antigen(tPSA) and free prostate specific antigen(fPSA) expression levels before treatment, 3 and 6 cycles after treatment were evaluated, and the side effects, PFS, and mortality rate were observed.Results: The results of the analysis of the generalized estimation equation showed that:in terms of between groups, repeated measurement results showed that the effective rate of the three groups was compared, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05); in terms of time points, the remission rate of patients at different time points was significantly different(P<0.05). Repeated measures analysis of variance showed that there was significant difference among the three groups of tPSA at the time point and between groups(P<0.05), but there was no statistical difference in the interactive comparison(P>0.05); the three groups of fPSA at time point, between groups, and the interaction comparison showed significant difference(P<0.05). The simple effect LSD-t paired comparison showed that before treatment, the difference between the three groups of tPSA and fPSA was not statistically significant(P>0.05); after 3 or 6 cycles of treatment, the tPSA and fPSA of the combination group were lower than those of the single agent 1 Group and single-drug group 2(P<0.01). There was statistically significant difference in the incidence of nausea and vomiting, peripheral neuritis, liver and kidney damage, and bone marrow suppression among the three groups(P<0.05); among them, nausea and vomiting, peripheral neuritis, and bone marrow suppression occurred in the combined drug group were lower than those of single-drug group 1(P<0.05); the incidence of platelet decline, anemia, liver and kidney damage in the combined drug group was lower than that of single-drug group 1, but the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05); there was no significant difference in the incidence of nausea and vomiting, peripheral neuritis, bone marrow suppression, platelet decline, anemia, liver and kidney function damage, etc. between the combined drug group and the single-drug 2 group(P>0.05); the incidence of nausea and vomiting, peripheral neuritis, bone marrow suppression, thrombocytopenia, anemia, liver and kidney function damage of the single-drug group 2 was lower than that of the single-drug group 1. The PFS of the combination medication group was significantly longer than that of the single-drug group 1 and the single-drug group 2(P<0.05), and the fatality rate was significantly lower than that of the single-drug group 1(P<0.05); the difference was not statistically significant in fatality rate between the combined-drug group and the single-drug group 2(P>0.05).Conclusion: Docetaxel combined with endocrine therapy has a significant effect on the treatment of CRPC, which can better control the development of the disease, and has high safety without serious side effects.
-
Key words:
- docetaxel /
- endocrine therapy /
- castration-resistant prostate cancer
-
-
[1] 沈志远, 陶晶, 徐骏, 等.转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌多西他赛/泼尼松治疗失败后加用雌二醇氮芥的疗效和安全性:单中心回顾性研究[J].临床泌尿外科杂志, 2020, 35(3):180-183.
[2] 余沁楠, 侯国栋, 唐钊, 等.培美曲塞联合奥沙利铂二线化疗治疗转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌的临床观察[J].临床泌尿外科杂志, 2019, 34(6):438-440.
[3] 中国医师协会放射肿瘤治疗医师分会, 中华医学会放射肿瘤治疗学分会, 中国抗癌协会肿瘤放射治疗专业委员会.中国前列腺癌放射治疗指南(2020年版)[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2021, 28(5):323-337.
[4] 林金德, 骆华春, 傅志超, 等.沙利度胺联合多西他赛治疗去势抵抗性前列腺癌的临床研究[J].检验医学与临床, 2018, 15(17):2543-2546.
[5] Clarke N, Wiechno P, Alekseev B, et al.Olaparib combined with abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer:a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial[J].Lancet Oncol.2018, 19(7):975-986.
[6] Antonarakis E S, Piulats J M, Gross-Goupil M, et al.Pembrolizumab for treatment-refractory metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer:Multicohort, Open-Label Phase II KEYNOTE-199 Study[J].J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(5):395-405.
[7] 胡林军, 李长岭, 寿建忠, 等.多西他赛治疗转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌的耐受剂量及其与预后的关系[J].中华泌尿外科杂志, 2019, 40(1):31-36.
[8] 田美娟, 宋相瑾, 王丽, 等.米托蒽醌联合沙利度胺挽救治疗经多西他赛治疗失败的晚期去势抵抗性前列腺癌的疗效观察[J].现代肿瘤医学, 2019, 27(20):3644-3647.
[9] 黄厚锋, 范欣荣, 纪志刚, 等.多西他赛联合顺铂方案治疗转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌一例报告[J].中华泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 39(1):17-18.
[10] Wülfing C, Bögemann M, Goebell PJ, et al.Therapiesituation beim metastasierten kastrationsnaiven Prostatakarzinom(mCNPC)und die Auswirkungen im klinischen Alltag[Treatment situation in metastastic Castration Naive Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)and the implications on clinical routine] [J].Urologe A, 2019, 58(9):1066-1072.
[11] 徐佩行, 沈益君, 肖文军, 等.高肿瘤负荷转移性激素敏感性前列腺癌内分泌治疗联合化疗的近期疗效与不良反应[J].中华外科杂志, 2019, 57(6):418-421.
[12] 周俊, 陈如, 马锋.经尿道前列腺等离子电切术联合内分泌疗法治疗晚期前列腺癌合并膀胱出口梗阻的临床疗效观察[J].国际泌尿系统杂志, 2020, 40(2):239-242.
[13] Fan L, Fei X, Zhu Y, et al.Comparative Analysis of Genomic Alterations across Castration Sensitive and Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer via Circulating Tumor DNA Sequencing[J].J Urol, 2021, 205(2):461-469.
[14] 吴波, 周东言, 杨波.阿比特龙辅助DP化疗治疗去势抵抗性前列腺癌的疗效观察[J].中国医师杂志, 2019, 21(5):779-781.
[15] 王业强, 秦勇, 刘渊, 等.阿比特龙联合泼尼松治疗雄激素剥夺治疗失败后转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌的可行性探讨[J].实用药物与临床, 2019, 22(9):937-942.
[16] 李俊, 杜鸿, 熊国兵, 等.去势抵抗性前列腺癌患者使用醋酸阿比特龙治疗后发生前列腺特异性抗原闪烁现象的相关因素[J].临床与病理杂志, 2018, 38(6):1228-1233.
[17] Nieder C, Dalhaug A, Haukland E.Feasibility and efficacy of sequential systemic therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a rural health care setting[J].Scand J Urol, 2020, 54(2):110-114.
[18] 刘浩, 彭倩, 何阳科, 等.阿比特龙联合强的松治疗去势抵抗性前列腺癌的临床观察[J].实用医院临床杂志, 2018, 15(4):49-51.
-
计量
- 文章访问数: 431
- PDF下载数: 452