Journal of B.U.ON. : official journal of the Balkan Union of Oncology · 2021
Clinical analysis of uterine arterial interventional chemoembolization combined with radiotherapy in mid-advanced cervical cancer.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aishanjiang Dilinaer, Han Lili, Niyazi Mayinuer, Hou Qingxiang
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of uterine arterial interventional chemoembolization (UAIC) combined with radiotherapy and intravenous chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy in the treatment of mid-advanced cervical cancer.
METHODS: The clinical data of 128 patients with mid-advanced cervical cancer were retrospectively analyzed. According to different treatment methods, the patients were divided into two groups. Docetaxel+nedaplatin UAIC combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy was performed in UAIC group (n=64), while docetaxel+nedaplatin intravenous chemotherapy combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was performed in the control group (n=64). The short-term clinical efficacy and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. The tumor recurrence and survival status were recorded during follow-up, and the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The short-term clinical response rate was 70.3% (45/64) and 48.4% (31/64), respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. In the functional scales of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), the scores of physical function, role function, cognitive function, emotional function and social function were higher in the UAIC group than in the control group, but only the emotional function score had a statistically significant difference. In the symptom scales, the scores of sleep disturbance, nausea and vomiting, pain and fatigue were obviously lower in the UAIC group than those in the control group. The general health score was 79.46±11.28 points and 78.17±13.49 points, respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. Follow-up results revealed that the 3-year OS was 70.3% (45/64) and 73.4% (47/64), and the 3-year PFS was 64.1% (41/64) and 65.6% (42/64), respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. Log-rank test showed that OS and PFS had no statistically significant differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: UAIC combined with radiotherapy has better short-term clinical efficacy than intravenous chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy in the treatment of mid-advanced cervical cancer, with fewer adverse reactions and higher quality of life, but it had no significant effect on the long-term survival and tumor progression.
METHODS: The clinical data of 128 patients with mid-advanced cervical cancer were retrospectively analyzed. According to different treatment methods, the patients were divided into two groups. Docetaxel+nedaplatin UAIC combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy was performed in UAIC group (n=64), while docetaxel+nedaplatin intravenous chemotherapy combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was performed in the control group (n=64). The short-term clinical efficacy and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. The tumor recurrence and survival status were recorded during follow-up, and the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The short-term clinical response rate was 70.3% (45/64) and 48.4% (31/64), respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. In the functional scales of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), the scores of physical function, role function, cognitive function, emotional function and social function were higher in the UAIC group than in the control group, but only the emotional function score had a statistically significant difference. In the symptom scales, the scores of sleep disturbance, nausea and vomiting, pain and fatigue were obviously lower in the UAIC group than those in the control group. The general health score was 79.46±11.28 points and 78.17±13.49 points, respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. Follow-up results revealed that the 3-year OS was 70.3% (45/64) and 73.4% (47/64), and the 3-year PFS was 64.1% (41/64) and 65.6% (42/64), respectively, in the UAIC and the control group. Log-rank test showed that OS and PFS had no statistically significant differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: UAIC combined with radiotherapy has better short-term clinical efficacy than intravenous chemotherapy combined with radiotherapy in the treatment of mid-advanced cervical cancer, with fewer adverse reactions and higher quality of life, but it had no significant effect on the long-term survival and tumor progression.