足叶已甙软胶囊和拓扑替康对复发食管小细胞癌二线化疗的疗效分析(附41例报告)

A analysis of Vp-16 versus Topotecan second-line chemotherapy effect in the relapsed primary esophageal small cell cancer-report of 41 case

目的比较和分析足叶已甙软胶囊和拓扑替康对食管小细胞癌二线化疗的疗效。方法选择2002年1月至2010年1月年收治的复发食管小细胞癌患者41例,按治疗方法不同分为足叶乙甙软胶囊组21例,予口服足叶已甙软胶囊(Vp-16)化疗;拓扑替康组20例,予拓扑替康(TPT)化疗。两组均至少完成2周期化疗,对两组患者的疗效及并发症发生情况进行对比分析。结果足叶乙甙软胶囊(Vp-16)化疗有效率为23.7%,中位疾病进展时间3个月,中位生存期40周;拓扑替康(TPT)化疗有效率为15.0%,中位疾病进展时间3个月,中位生存期38周。1年生存率分别为42.9%和35.0%。主要不良反应为白细胞和血小板下降,拓扑替康明显重于Vp-16。结论口服足叶乙甙软胶囊单药(Vp-16)二线化疗对晚期复发食管小细胞未分化癌患者的疗效不低于拓扑替康,且不良反应轻微。

ObjectiveTo compare the effects of Vp-16 and Topotecan as the second-line chemotherapy for patient with recurrent esophageal small cell cancer （PESC）.MethodsForty-one patients with recurrent esophageal small cell cancer from January 2002 to January 2010 were randomly divided into 2 groups.Twenty-one patients in group A were treated with Vp-16 orally,and twenty patients in group B were treated with Topotecan by infusion.All the enrolled patients were received 2 cycles of treatment at least.Result The response rates were 23.7% in group A and 15% in group B.One-year survival rate were 42.9% in group A and 35% in group B.The main toxicities were leucopenia and thrombocytopenia,which were obviously serious in group B.Conclusion The effect of Vp-16 on treating advanced recurrent esophageal small cell cancer is not less than that of Topotecan.Compared to Topotecan,Vp-16 has mild adverse reaction and toxicity.