中国医科大学学报

中国医科大学学报

中国医科大学学报 ›› 2012, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 373–376.

• 临床医学 • 上一篇    下一篇

美罗华联合CHOP方案与单用CHOP方案治疗Ⅲ、Ⅳ期弥漫大B细胞性淋巴瘤的临床对比研究

王晓雪,高然,于锦香,蔡大利,李艳   

  1. (中国医科大学附属第一医院血液科,沈阳110001)
  • 收稿日期:2012-09-24 修回日期:2012-09-24 出版日期:2012-04-20 发布日期:2012-09-26

Comparison between of Efficacy and Safety between of Rituximab plus CHOP (R-CHOP) and CHOP Regimen on patients with Stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma

WANG Xiao-xue,GAO Ran,YU Jin-xiang,CAI Da-li,LI Yan   

  1. (Department of Hematology,The First Hospital,China Medical University,shenyangShenyang 110001, China)
  • Received:2012-09-24 Revised:2012-09-24 Online:2012-04-20 Published:2012-09-26

摘要: 目的 比较美罗华联合CHOP方案和单用CHOP方案治疗Ⅲ、Ⅳ期弥漫大B细胞性淋巴瘤(DLBCL)的疗效、生存和不良反应。方法 采用同期(2008年1月至2010年9月)非随机对照的方法,将56例弥漫大B细胞性淋巴瘤患者分为2组,美罗华联合CHOP治疗组(R-CHOP组)26例,CHOP治疗组(CHOP组)30例,比较2组患者的疗效、生存率、无进展生存率及不良反应。结果 R-CHOP组患者完全缓解15例,部分缓解8例,总有效率为88.5%(2326); CHOP组完全缓解11例,部分缓解8例,总有效率为63.3%(1930),两组疗效差异有统计学意义(P =0.036) ; R-CHOP 组和CHOP组1年总生存率分别为96.1%和76.7%,差异有统计学意义(P=0.041),1年无进展生存率分别为80.8%和56.7%,差异有统计学意义(P=0.049)。两组患者的不良反应主要为胃肠道反应、轻中度骨髓抑制和输液相关不良反应,不良反应发生率相近,分别为38.5%和33.3%,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 美罗华联合CHOP方案能够提高治疗弥漫大B细胞性淋巴瘤患者的疗效,而不良反应未见明显增加,可作为该病的一线治疗方案。

关键词: 关键词 弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤, 美罗华, 化疗, CHOP方案

Abstract: Abstract Objective To compare the effect and saftysafety of rituximab plus CHOP (R-CHOP) and CHOP regimen on patients with stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods A total of 56 patients with Stage Ⅲ and Ⅳ DLBCL Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma were studied.They were non-randomly divided into two groups 26 patients were treated with R-CHOP, the others with CHOP . NHL international efficacy assessment and WHO criteria were used to assess the therapeutic and the adverse effects, respectively. Results The overall response rate of R-CHOP group was 88.5% , including 15 complete remissions (CR) and 8 partial remissions (PR. ), and tThat of the CHOP group was 63.3% with 11 CR and 8 PR. The response rate was significantly higher in R-CHOP group than that in CHOP group ( P =0.036). The one-year survival rate was 96.1% in R-CHOP group and 76.7% in CHOP group, respectively. The one-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 80.8% and 56.7%, respectively. There were significant differences between one-year survival rates and PFS rates in two groups. ( P 0. 05). The major side effects in both regimens were gastrointestinal toxicity, and mild to moderate myelosuppression, and adverse reactions to transfusion with no significant difference. ( P 0.05). Conclusions Comparing Compared with CHOP, R-CHOPrituximab plus CHOP regimen increases the therapeutic efficacy to in patients with stage Ⅲ and ⅣDLBCL Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma, and has no significant increase in toxicity. R-CHOP regimen should be applied to the first line chemotherapy.

Key words: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, rituximab, chemotherapy , CHOP regimen

中图分类号: 

  • R551.2 文献标志码 A 文章编号
[1]Jaffe ES, Harris NL, Stein H, et al. World Health Organization classification tumours. Pathology and genetics of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissue[C]. IARC Press, 2001.
[2]Ferrara F,Ravasio R.Cost-effectiveness analysis of the addition of rituximab to CHOP in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma [ J].Clin Drug Investig,2008,28(1)55-56
[3]Marcus R. Current treatment options in aggressive lymphoma [ J] . Leuk Lymphoma, 2003, 44 (Suppl 4) S15- 27.[ 4]Wim EV, van Putten LJ, van't Veer MB, et al. Rituximab improves the treatment results of DHAP-VIM-D HAP and ASCT in relapsedprogreessive aggressive CD20+ NHL a prospective randomized HOVON trial[J]. Blood, 2008, 111(2) 537-43.
[5]EI Gnaoui T, Dupuis J, Belhadj K, et al. Rituximab, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin an effective salvage regimen for patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphoma not candidates for high-dose therapy[J]. Ann Oncol, 2007, 18(8) 1363-8.
[6]王潇潇,黄慧强,夏忠军,等. 利妥昔单抗联合挽救化疗治疗复发或难治弥漫大B细胞性非霍奇金淋巴瘤的长期随访结果[J]. 南方医科大学学报,2010,30(4):867-870
[7]张之南,杨天楹,郝玉书,等.血液病学M.北京:人民卫生出版社,2003,1290-1291
[8]Zelenetz AD, Hoppe RT. NCCN non-hodgkin′s lymphoma practice guidelines panel [ J ]. Cancer Control, 2001, 8 ( 6 Suppl 2 ) 102-113
[9]Forero A, Lobuglio AF. History of antibody therapy for non-Hodgkins lymphoma [ J] . Semin Oncol, 2003, 30( 6 Suppl 17) 1- 5.
[10]Li B ,Shi S,Qian W,et al.Development of novel tetravalent anti-CD20 antibodies with potent antitumor activity [ J].Cancer Res, 2008, 68(7) 2400-2408
[11]Pfreundschuh M, Trmper L, Osterborg A, et al. CHOP -like chemotherapy plus rituximab versus CHOP – like chemotherapy alone in young patients with good – prognosis diffuse large - B - cell lymphoma a randomised controlled trial by the Mab Thera International Trial (Min T) Group [ J ]. Lancet Oncol, 2006, 7 (5) 379 - 391.
[12]Coiffier B. Feugier P. Mounier N.Long-term results of the GELA study comparing R-CHOP and CHOP chemotherapy in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma show good survival in poor-risk patients[ J ]. J Clin Oncol,2007, 25(suppl 18)8009-8012
[13]Feugier P, Van Hoof A, Sebban C, et al. Long- term results of the R- CHOP study in the treatment of elderly patients with diffuse large B - cell lymphoma a study by the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2005, 23 (18) 4117-4126
[14]Coffier B, Lepage E, Briere J, et al. CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patientswith diffuse large - B- cell lymphoma [ J ]. N Engl J Med, 2002, 346 (4) 235 - 242.
[15]徐卫,李健勇.R-CHOP方案与CHOP方案治疗初治弥漫性大B细胞淋巴瘤的临床研究[ J]. 中国实验血液学杂志,2008,16(4):933-937
[16]Zwick C,Gleissner B, Pfreundschuh M.Aspects of chemotherapy schedules in young and elderly patients with aggressive lymphoma [ J]. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma,2007,8(Suppl 2)S43
[17]Rossi D,Rasi S,Franceschetti S,et al.Analysis of the host phamacogenetic background for prediction of outcome and toxicity in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP21[ J ]. Leukemia, 2009,23(6)1118-1126
[18]Illidge T,Tolan S.Current treatment approaches for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma[ J].Leuk Lymphoma,2008,49(4)663-676
[19]Habermann TM, Weller EA, Morrison VA, et al. Rituximab-CHOP versus CHOP alone or with maintenance rituximab in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2006, 24(19)3121-3127
[20] Dervite I, Hober D, Morel P. Acute hepatitis B in a patient with antibodies to hepatitis B surface antigen who was receiving rituximab [ J] . N Engl J Med, 2001, 344( 1) 68- 69.
[21]Ng HJ, Lim LC. Fulminant hepatitis B virus reactivation with concomitant listeriosis after fludarabine and rituximab therapycase report [ J] . Ann Hematol, 2001, 80( 9) 549- 552.
[1] 裘敬平, 党军, 蔡峰, 李光. 基于病史、体征、血常规的食管癌预后评分系统的初步构建[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2018, 47(1): 36-41.
[2] 李达,毕芳芳,杨清. BRCA1在不同化疗敏感性浆液性卵巢癌中的表达及表观遗传学调节机制[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2016, 45(5): 385-388.
[3] 于玲,姜桂春,苏兰若,黄晶. 三种外用药物预防5-氟尿嘧啶持续泵入所致外周化疗性静脉炎的临床效果[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2015, 44(7): 610-613.
[4] 谷潇, 闫顺朝, 李午生, 赵力, 邹华伟. 热疗联合化疗治疗卵巢癌的Meta分析[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2015, 44(6): 489-494.
[5] 魏晓琳,邢鹏,李丽莉. 植入式输液港与PICC在乳腺癌化疗中的应用的比较[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2015, 44(5): 476-477.
[6] 刘阳, 陈光磊. PICC个性化护理在恶性肿瘤化疗中的应用[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2015, 44(10): 947-949.
[7] 张萍,王敏,接智慧,双婷,闫效宇,周莹莹,吴建磊. miR?210在化疗耐药与化疗敏感卵巢浆液性癌组织中的检测及意义[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2014, 43(6): 487-492.
[8] 徐微娜,于树鹏,辛军,郭启勇. 18F?FLT和18F?FDG PET?CT显像评价Wistar大鼠Walker256肿瘤化疗后的早期疗效[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2014, 43(1): 45-48.
[9] 李培文,韩立波,张其刚,张林. 肺大细胞神经内分泌癌的手术治疗(附16例报告)[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2013, 42(4): 318-320.
[10] 陶陶,王敏. 化疗耐药及敏感卵巢癌细胞差异表达microRNA的筛查与组织鉴定[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2013, 42(2): 118-122.
[11] 李正红 郭科军 薛晖. 新辅助化疗治疗晚期卵巢癌的临床疗效评价[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2012, 41(7): 645-649.
[12] 赵俊刚,任开明,汤隽,张磊. 维甲酸联合低浓度化疗药物对肺腺癌A549细胞的作用[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2012, 41(6): 511-513.
[13] 何英,王士勇,于环,张晖,杜微丽,张哲,梁春艳,王佳玲,武秀艳,张璐. 进展期非小细胞肺癌内科治疗的生存获益分析[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2012, 41(5): 476-477.
[14] 李成浩,马英桓,颜永红. 顺铂与洛铂腹腔灌注治疗胃肠道肿瘤比较分析[J]. 中国医科大学学报, 2012, 41(1): 73-77.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!

中国医科大学学报版权所有©2018

未经允许,严禁擅自转载本站图文资料

地址:中国 沈阳市沈北新区蒲河路77号 110122

辽ICP备05014850

JOURNAL OF CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY

ADDRESS: NO.77 PUHE ROAD

SHENYANG NORTH NEW AREA, SHENYANG

LIAONING PROVINCE, P.R. CHINA