期刊文献+

胸腔引流联合免疫疗法治疗老年肺癌患者胸腔积液的疗效观察 被引量:3

Effects of thoracic drainage combined with immunotherapy on pleural effusion in elderly patients with lung cancer
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:分析胸腔引流联合免疫疗法治疗老年肺癌合并胸腔积液患者的临床疗效及对VEGF和AQP1水平的影响。方法:将我院2017年04月至2019年04月间收治的100例老年肺癌胸腔积液患者随机分为A组、B组及C组;A组患者采用胸腔引流术治疗,B组患者采用免疫疗法治疗,C组患者采用胸腔引流联合免疫疗法治疗;治疗后参照WHO对患者的癌性渗液治疗的近期疗效进行评估;治疗前及治疗后4周采用Karnofsky评分标准对患者生活质量进行评估;治疗前及治疗后采集患者胸腔积液检测其中CEA、CYFRA21-1、NSE、VEGF和AQP1水平。结果:经治疗后C组患者治疗总有效率及生活质量均明显好于A组及B组,且差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗后C组患者胸腔积液中CEA、NSE及CYFRA21-1水平明显低于A组及B组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);治疗后C组患者胸腔积液中VEGF及AQP1水平明显低于A组及B组,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),B组患者胸腔积液中VEGF水平显著低于A组(P<0.05),但A组与B组患者胸腔积液中AQP1水平无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:采用胸腔引流联合免疫疗法治疗老年肺癌患者胸腔积液可显著提高患者治疗疗效及生活质量,并可有效降低胸腔积液中VEGF和AQP1蛋白表达。 Objective:To analyze the clinical efficacy of thoracic drainage combined with immunotherapy in the treatment of elderly lung cancer patients with pleural effusion and the method of influencing the levels of vascular endothelial growth factor and AQP1.Methods:From April 2017 to April 2019,100 elderly patients with pleural effusion from lung cancer were randomly divided into group A,group B and group C.Patients in group A were treated with thoracic drainage.Patients in group B were treated with immunotherapy,and patients in group C were treated with thoracic drainage combined with immunotherapy.Karnofsky score was used to evaluate the quality of life of patients before and 4 weeks after treatment.The levels of CEA,CYFRA21-1,NSE,VEGF and AQP1 were measured before and after treatment.Results:After treatment,the total effective rate and quality of life in group C were significantly higher than those in group A and group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After treatment,the levels of CEA,NSE and CYFRA21-1 in pleural effusion in group C were significantly lower than those in group A and group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).After treatment,the levels of VEGF and AQP1 in pleural effusion in group C were lower than those in group A and group B,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The level of vascular endothelial growth factor in pleural effusion in group B was significantly lower than that in group A(P<0.05),but the level of AQP1 in pleural effusion in group A and group B had no significantdifference(P>0.05).Conclusion:Thoracic drainage combined with immunotherapy can significantly improve the therapeutic efficacy and quality of life of elderly patients with pleural effusion of lung cancer,and effectively reduce the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and AQP1 protein in pleural effusion.
作者 李伟 代丽 叶骉飞 程春宏 LI Wei;DAI Li;YE Biaofei;CHENG Chunhong(Cardiothoracic Surgery Department,Xi'an Gaoxin Hospital,Shaanxi Xi'an 710075,China;Oncological Radiotherapy Department,Chang'an Hospital,Shaanxi Xi'an 710017,China;Oncology Department,Xi'an No.3 Hospital,the Affiliated Hospital of Northwest University,Shaanxi Xi'an 710018,China;Pathology Laboratory,Shaanxi Energy Institute,Shaanxi Xi'an 710613,China)
出处 《现代肿瘤医学》 CAS 北大核心 2021年第17期3026-3030,共5页 Journal of Modern Oncology
关键词 胸腔引流术 免疫疗法 老年肺癌合并胸腔积液 血管内皮生长因子 水通道蛋白 thoracic drainage immunotherapy elderly lung cancer with pleural effusion vascular endothelial growth factor aquaporin
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献38

  • 1Yan-Fang Yu,Yong Zhang,Na Shen,Rui-Ying Zhang,Xin-Qing Lu.Effect of VEGF,P53 and telomerase on angiogenesis of gastric carcinoma tissue[J].Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine,2014,7(4):293-296. 被引量:15
  • 2[1]WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment[M]. Offset Publication No.48. Geneva (Switzerland) : World Health Organization, 1979.
  • 3[2]Duffaud F, Therasse P. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors [J]. Bull Cancer, 2000,87:881-886.
  • 4[3]James K, Eisenhauer E, Christian M, et al. Measuring response in solid tumors: unidimensional versus bidimensional measurement [J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 1999,91:523-528.
  • 5[4]Padhani AR, MRCP, FRCR, et al. The REC1ST criteria:implications for diagnostic radiologists [J]. Br J Radiol, 2000,74:983-986.
  • 6[5]Werner-Wasik M, Xiao Y, Pequignot E, et al. Assessment of lung cancer response after nonoporative therapy: tumor diameter,bidimensional product, and volume. A serial ct scan-based study[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2001,51:56-61.
  • 7Travis WD, Asamura H, Bankier AA, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Coding T Categories for Subsolid Nodules and Assessment of Tumor Size in Part-Solid Tumors in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification of Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 2016. [Epub ahead of print].
  • 8Detterbeck FC, Franklin WA, Nicholson AG, et al. The IASLC lung cancer staging proiect: background data and proposed criteria to distinguish separate primary lung cancers from metastatic foci in patients with two lung tumors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 2016, 11 (5): 651-665.
  • 9Detterbeck FC, Bolejack V, Arenberg DA, et al. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: background data and proposals for the classification of lung cancer with separate tumor nodules in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol, 2016, 11 (5): 681-692.
  • 10Detterbeck FC, Nicholson AG, Franklin WA, et al. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: summary of proposals for revisions of the classification of lung cancers with multiple pulmonary sites of involvement in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification. J Thorac O ncol, 2016, 11(5): 639-650.

共引文献168

同被引文献49

二级引证文献5

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部