伊立替康与拓扑替康分别联合奈达铂治疗小细胞肺癌的疗效及安全性比较

中国临床药理学与治疗学 ›› 2017, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (8): 943-947.

伊立替康与拓扑替康分别联合奈达铂治疗小细胞肺癌的疗效及安全性比较

张照伟，方甜子，刘健霞

浙江省金华市中心医院药剂科，金华 321000，浙江

收稿日期:2017-01-24 修回日期:2017-03-06 出版日期:2017-08-26 发布日期:2017-08-18
作者简介:张照伟，女，硕士，主管药师，主要从事心血管及肿瘤临床药学研究。 Tel：15058504824 E-mail:quhaizhijia@163.com
基金资助:
浙江省金华市科技局一般项目（2013-3-006）

Study of the efficacy and safty of irinotecan combined with nedaplatin versus topotecan combined with nedaplatin in treatment of small lung cancer

ZHANG Zhaowei, FANG Tianzi, LIU Jianxia

Department of Pharmacy, Jin Hua Central Hospital, Jinhua 321000, Zhejiang, China

Received:2017-01-24 Revised:2017-03-06 Online:2017-08-26 Published:2017-08-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 本研究旨在比较伊立替康（CPT）与拓扑替康（TPT）分别联合奈达铂（NDP）治疗广泛期小细胞肺癌的临床疗效及安全性。方法: 前瞻性分析了89例广泛期小细胞肺癌患者，其中44例CPT+NDP组，45例TPT+NDP组，两组均以3周为1个周期，至少化疗两个周期，CPT+NDP组第1天静脉注射奈达铂80 mg/m2，第1、8、15天静脉注射伊立替康60 mg/m2；TPT+NDP组第1天静脉注射奈达铂80 mg/m2，第1～5天静脉注射拓扑替康1.2 mg/m2，比较两组的临床有效率（RR），疾病控制率（DCR），中位总生存期（OS），中位无进展生存期（OS）和不良反应的差异。结果: 两组的RR分别为36.36%和37.78%，DCR分别为72.73%和66.67%，无统计学差异（P>0.05），表明两组的近期疗效相似。两组的中位无进展生存期分别为6.5个月和5.8个月，中位总生存期分别为12.0个月和11.2个月，两组无统计学差异（P>0.05），表明两组远期疗效相似。CPT+NDP组腹泻和中性粒细胞减少的不良反应重于TPT+NDP组(P<0.05)，而TPT+NDP组白细胞减少和血小板减少的不良反应重于CPT+NDP组（P<0.05）。结论: CPT+NDP组及TPT+NDP组治疗广泛期小细胞肺癌的近期、远期疗效相似，前者不良反应以腹泻和中性粒细胞减少为主，后者不良反应以白细胞和血小板减少为主，但均能耐受，可根据患者身体具体情况选择药物。

关键词: 伊立替康, 拓扑替康, 奈达铂, 疗效, 不良发应

Abstract:

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety between irinotecan (CPT) and topotecan (TPT) combined with nedaplatin (NDP) in the treatment of extensive small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Eighty-nine cases of patients who have been diagnosed as extensive small cell lung cancer were analyzed, in which 44 cases received CPT+NDP while the other 45 cases received TPT+NDP as chemotherapy. Three weeks are one treatment course, every patient in two groups accepted more than 2 periods of chemotherapy. On the first day of each course, they received intravenous drip with LBP 30 mg/m2. In addition, CPT+NDP group was given intravenous drip with NDP 80 mg/m2 on the first day and CPT 60 mg/m2 on the first eighth, fifteenth day, while TPT+NDP group was given intravenous drip with NDP 80 mg/m2 on the first day and TPT 1.2 mg/m2 on the first to fifth day. Comparison was made between the clinical response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), median overall survival, median progression-free survival and adverse reactions between the two groups. RESULTS:The RR of the two groups were 36.36% and 37.78%, the CDR of the two groups were 72.73%and 66.67%. There was no significant differences between the two groups (P>0.05). The median overall survival of the two groups were 12.0 months and 11.2 months, the median progression-free survival were 6.5 months and 5.8 months weeks, there are also no differences between the two groups (P>0.05). The CPT+NDP group was milder than the TPT+NDP group in the leukopenia and the thrombopenia (P<0.05), while more severe than the TPT group in the diarrhea and neutrophilic (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The curative effect of CPT combined with NDP is similar with the TPT combined with NDP on the treatment of extensive small cell lung cancer patients. The main adverse reaction of the former one is diarrhea and neukopenia, while the latter one is leukopenia and thrombopenia. Therapeutic regimen should be chosen according to the patients' physical condition.

Key words: irinotecan, topotecan, nedaplatin, efficacy, adverse reaction

中图分类号:

R734.2

张照伟，方甜子，刘健霞. 伊立替康与拓扑替康分别联合奈达铂治疗小细胞肺癌的疗效及安全性比较[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2017, 22(8): 943-947.

ZHANG Zhaowei, FANG Tianzi, LIU Jianxia. Study of the efficacy and safty of irinotecan combined with nedaplatin versus topotecan combined with nedaplatin in treatment of small lung cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2017, 22(8): 943-947.

[1]	许宜琪, 吴茜, 刘书, 刘帆, 邢春燕, 李勤, 何俊俊, 何春玲, 赵咏莉, 高家林. 雷公藤多苷治疗糖尿病肾脏病的临床疗效及抗炎抗纤维化分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2023, 28(9): 1034-1042.
[2]	肖悦, 李唐菲, 薛乾富. 聚乙二醇干扰素-α治疗原发性血小板增多症的疗效和安全性分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2023, 28(9): 1049-1055.
[3]	黄小明, 杜野, 林少明, 沈观乐. 呼吸道微生态对晚期非小细胞肺癌患者接受PD-1抑制剂单药治疗疗效影响的探索性研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2023, 28(1): 66-74.
[4]	晏玉奎, 胡建琴, 张冰. 新型和传统抗癫痫药物治疗新诊断部分性癫痫的临床研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2022, 27(7): 793-799.
[5]	鲍静, 陈晓文, 夏亮, 赵雨辰, 夏瑞祥, 夏海龙. 伊沙佐米治疗多发性骨髓瘤的临床疗效和安全性分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2021, 26(7): 782-786.
[6]	黄伊婷, 沈爱宗. 阿法替尼治疗肺癌的临床疗效与安全性[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2021, 26(4): 474-480.
[7]	李静, 马丽娟, 袁圆, 王捷, 郁长治, 赵军. 吸入性糖皮质激素布地奈德相关基因多态性与哮喘疗效的关系[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2021, 26(11): 1250-1258.
[8]	林荣芳, 郑玮玮, 刘亦伟, 林翠鸿, 王长连, 黄品芳. 克罗恩病患者英夫利西单抗相关基因多态性与血药浓度及疗效关联性研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2020, 25(9): 1000-1006.
[9]	赵倩，杨广，曹莉华，于陈宝. CNR1基因遗传变异对利拉鲁肽治疗早期2型糖尿病患者临床疗效的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2020, 25(2): 182-188.
[10]	石莉莉, 刘兴安, 单国用. 阿帕替尼后线治疗标准方案失败的晚期结直肠癌的疗效和安全性及疗效预测因子的初步分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2020, 25(12): 1388-1394.
[11]	闫盼, 施剑飞, 李静, 王晟东, 王姝琪, 汪程鹏, 宋明芬. DRD2和5-HTR2A基因多态性及其交互作用对奥氮平治疗精神分裂症疗效的影响[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2020, 25(10): 1131-1138.
[12]	尹子毅，王峰，赵梦，张铁，王丕琳. 卡培他滨为基础一线方案治疗Her2阴性转移性乳腺癌的单中心回顾性研究及TYMP基因多态性分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(9): 1002-1008.
[13]	林敏，沈仲夏，钱敏才，崔力军，任列，蔡敏，沈鑫华. 5-羟色胺转运体基因多态性与抗抑郁剂治疗广泛性焦虑障碍疗效的关联[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(8): 903-909.
[14]	温纯洁，张颖，吴兰香，周宏灏. 维罗非尼对UGT1A1介导的伊立替康代谢的抑制作用研究[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(7): 773-777.
[15]	朱悚之. 人纤维蛋白原对急诊外伤致创伤性凝血病疗效及相关因素分析[J]. 中国临床药理学与治疗学, 2019, 24(6): 693-698.