阿帕替尼联合放化疗对晚期胃癌疗效及肿瘤标志物的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的观察阿帕替尼联合放化疗方案治疗晚期胃癌的近、远期疗效及对肿瘤标志物的影响。方法选取2013年1月至2017年1月西安市长安医院肿瘤科收治的84例晚期胃癌患者为研究对象,采用前瞻性巢式对照研究法将患者分为同步放化疗组和靶向放化疗组,每组42例。同步放化疗组接受同步放化疗治疗方案治疗,靶向放化疗组接受阿帕替尼联合放化疗方案治疗,2周为1个周期,共12个周期。比较两组患者的近期和远期疗效、中位总生存期及胃癌相关标志物变化及不良反应发生情况。结果治疗3个月后,同步放化疗组和靶向放化疗组疗效分布差异无统计学意义(Z=0.240,P=0.887),两组患者的疾病控制率分别为69.05%(29/42)和73.81%(31/42),差异无统计学意义(χ²=0.233,P=0.629)。治疗6个月后,同步放化疗组和靶向放化疗组疗效分布差异具有统计学意义(Z=6.288,P=0.043),两组患者的疾病控制率分别为42.86%(18/42)和69.05%(29/42),差异具有统计学意义(χ²=5.845,P=0.016)。靶向放化疗组和同步放化疗组的中位总生存期分别为18.7个月(95%CI为8.4~24.8)和13.8个月(95%CI为7.2~18.7),差异具有统计学意义(χ²=7.542,P<0.001)。治疗3个月后,靶向放化疗组的糖类抗原(CA)19-9、CA125、癌胚抗原(CEA)分别为(16.27±2.13)U/ml、(13.25±2.26)U/ml、(2.97±0.85)ng/ml,同步放化疗组分别为(29.34±3.69)U/ml、(21.63±2.69)U/ml、(6.19±1.23)ng/ml,均较本组内治疗前降低,且治疗后靶向放化疗组的CA19-9、CA125、CEA均低于同步放化疗组,差异均具有统计学意义(t=19.880,P<0.001;t=15.458,P<0.001;t=13.957,P<0.001)。靶向放化疗组和同步放化疗组的3~4级不良反应总发生率分别为23.81%(10/42)和28.64%(12/42),差异无统计学意义(χ²=0.186,P=0.667)。结论阿帕替尼联合放化疗治疗晚期胃癌远期疗效优于同步放化疗,且安全可靠,同时可延长总生存期,降低血清肿瘤标志物水平。

关键词:胃肿瘤,放射疗法,药物疗法,生物标记,阿帕替尼

Abstract:

ObjectiveTo observe the short- and long-term efficacy of apatinib combined with chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer and its effect on tumor markers.MethodsFrom January 2013 to January 2017, 84 patients with advanced gastric cancer admitted to the Department of Oncology of Chang'an Hospital of Xi'an City were selected as the subjects. The patients were divided into synchronous chemoradiotherapy group and targeted chemoradiotherapy group by prospective nested control method, with 42 cases in each group. The synchronous chemoradiotherapy group was treated with synchronous chemoradiotherapy, and the targeted chemoradiotherapy group was treated with apatinib combined with chemoradiotherapy, 2 weeks was a cycle, a total of 12 cycles. The short- and long-term efficacy, median overall survival, changes of gastric cancer-related markers and adverse reactions of the two groups were compared.ResultsAfter 3 months of treatment, there was no significant difference in the efficacy distribution between the synchronous chemoradiotherapy group and the targeted chemoradiotherapy group (Z=0.240,P=0.887). The disease control rates of the two groups were 69.05% (29/42) and 73.81% (31/42) respectively, with no statistically significant difference (χ²=0.233,P=0.629). After 6 months of treatment, the difference of the efficacy distribution between the synchronous chemoradiotherapy group and the targeted chemoradiotherapy group was statistically significant (Z=6.288,P=0.043), and the disease control rates of the two groups were 42.86% (18/42) and 69.05% (29/42) respectively, with a statistically significant difference (χ²=5.845,P=0.016). The median overall survival in the targeted chemoradiotherapy group and synchronous chemoradiotherapy groups were 18.7 months (95%CI: 8.4-24.8) and 13.8 months (95%CI: 7.2-18.7), with a statistically significant difference (χ²=7.542,P<0.001). After 3 months of treatment, the levels of carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9, CA125, carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) were (16.27±2.13) U/ml, (13.25±2.26) U/ml, (2.97±0.85) ng/ml in the targeted chemoradiotherapy group and (29.34±3.69) U/ml, (21.63±2.69) U/ml, (6.19±1.23) ng/ml in the synchronous chemoradiotherapy group respectively, all of them were lower than those before treatment, and the CA19-9, CA125, CEA in the targeted chemoradiotherapy group were lower than those in the synchronous chemoradiotherapy group, and there were statistically significant differences (t=19.880,P<0.001;t=15.458,P<0.001;t=13.957,P<0.001). The total incidence of grade 3-4 adverse reactions in the targeted chemoradiotherapy group was 23.81% (10/42) and 28.64% (12/42) in the synchronous chemoradiotherapy group, and there was no statistically significant difference (χ²=0.186,P=0.667).ConclusionThe long-term efficacy of apatinib combined with chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer is better than that of synchronous chemoradiotherapy, and it is safe and reliable. At the same time, it can prolong the overall survival and reduce the levels of serum tumor markers.

Key words:Stomach neoplasm,Radiotherapy,Drug therapy,Biomarkers,Apatinib

王旋, 崔立春, 党升强. 阿帕替尼联合放化疗对晚期胃癌疗效及肿瘤标志物的影响[J]. 国际肿瘤学杂志, 2021, 48(10): 602-607.

Wang Xuan, Cui Lichun, Dang Shengqiang. Effects of apatinib combined with chemoradiotherapy on the efficacy and tumor markers of advanced gastric cancer[J]. Journal of International Oncology, 2021, 48(10): 602-607.

图/表6

表1

两组晚期胃癌患者基线资料比较[例(%)/ x ?±s]"

基本特征	同步放化疗组 (n=42)	靶向放化疗组 (n=42)	χ²/t值	P值
性别
男	22(52.38)	23(54.76)	0.048	0.827
女	20(47.62)	19(46.24)
年龄(岁)	56.83±4.82	56.71±4.92	0.113	0.910
体力状况评分(分)
0	24(57.14)	25(59.52)
1	12(28.57)	12(28.97)	0.111	0.946
2	6(14.29)	5(11.91)
主要转移部位
骨	4(9.52)	3(7.14)
肝	6(14.29)	7(16.67)	0.380	0.827
肾	2(4.73)	3(7.14)

表1

组别	完全缓解	部分缓解	病情稳定	疾病进展	疾病控制
同步放化疗组(n=42)	0(0)	10(23.81)	19(45.24)	13(30.95)	29(69.05)
靶向放化疗组(n=42)	0(0)	11(26.19)	20(47.62)	11(26.19)	31(73.81)
Z/χ²值	0.240	0.233
P值	0.887	0.629

表2

组别	完全缓解	部分缓解	病情稳定	疾病进展	疾病控制
同步放化疗组(n=42)	0(0)	6(14.29)	12(28.57)	24(57.14)	18(42.86)
靶向放化疗组(n=42)	0(0)	7(16.67)	22(52.38)	13(30.95)	29(69.05)
Z/χ²值	6.288	5.845
P值	0.043	0.016

表3

组别	CA19-9(U/ml)	CA125(U/ml)	CEA(ng/ml)
同步放化疗组(n=42)	56.82±10.12	29.34±3.69^a	47.46±5.97	21.63±2.69^a	16.28±2.24	6.19±1.23^a
靶向放化疗组(n=42)	56.66±10.28	16.27±2.13^a	47.12±5.88	13.25±2.26^a	16.78±2.12	2.97±0.85^a
t值	0.072	19.880	0.263	15.458	1.050	13.957
P值	0.943	<0.001	0.793	<0.001	0.297	<0.001

表4

图1

不良反应	同步放化疗组 (n=42)	靶向放化疗组 (n=42)	χ²值	P值
白细胞减少	3(7.14)	3(7.14)	<0.001	>0.999
中性线粒细胞减少	3(7.14)	4(9.52)	0.156	0.693
血小板减少	3(7.14)	3(7.14)	<0.001	>0.999
恶心、呕吐	1(2.38)	2(4.76)	0.346	0.556
合计	10(23.81)	12(28.64)	0.186	0.667

表5

参考文献22

[1]	王静雷, 杨一兵, 耿云霞, 等. 1990—2017年中国胃癌发病、患病及死亡状况趋势分析[J]. 中国慢性病预防与控制, 2020, 28(5):321-325. DOI: 10.16386/j.cjpccd.issn.1004-6194.2020.05.001. doi:10.16386/j.cjpccd.issn.1004-6194.2020.05.001
[2]	Youn SI, Son SY, Lee K, et al. Quality of life after laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery in early gastric cancer: a single-center cohort study[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2021, 24(3):744-751. DOI: 10.1007/S10120-020-01145-6. doi:10.1007/S10120-020-01145-6
[3]	Inaki N, Etoh T, Ohyama T, et al. A multi-institutional, prospective, phase Ⅱ feasibility study of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer (JLSSG0901)[J]. World J Surg, 2015, 39(11):2734-2741. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-015-3160-z. doi:10.1007/s00268-015-3160-z
[4]	Matsunaga T, Ishiguro R, Miyauchi W, et al. Appraisal of long-time outcomes after curative surgery in elderly patients with gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis[J]. BMC Surg, 2021, 21(1):33. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-021-01046-0. doi:10.1186/s12893-021-01046-0
[5]	Cao S, Zheng T, Wang H, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery in elderly gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic total gastrectomy[J]. J Surg Res, 2021, 25(7):1384-1387. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.07.037. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2020.07.037
[6]	Batooei S, Moslehi A, Pirayesh IJ, et al. Assessment of metallic nanoparticles as radioenhancers in gastric cancer therapy by Geant4 simulation and local effect model[J]. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B, 2021, 488:5-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.nimb.2020.11.019. doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2020.11.019
[7]	Zhao LY, Peng Y, He S, et al. Apatinib induced ferroptosis by lipid peroxidation in gastric cancer[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2021, 24(3):642-654. DOI: 10.1007/S10120-021-01159-8. doi:10.1007/S10120-021-01159-8
[8]	皋文君, 刘砚燕, 袁长蓉. 国际肿瘤化疗药物不良反应评价系统——通用不良反应术语标准4.0版[J]. 肿瘤, 2012, 32(2):142-144. DOI: 10.3781/j.issn.1000-7431.2012.02.013. doi:10.3781/j.issn.1000-7431.2012.02.013
[9]	许清, 周彬. 调强放疗在晚期胃癌根治术后淋巴结转移患者中的临床效果及对炎症因子、免疫功能的影响研究[J]. 川北医学院学报, 2019, 34(6):756-759. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-3697.2019.06.26. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1005-3697.2019.06.26
[10]	Wang LY, Zhou LL. Intelligent hospital and clinical effect of omeprazole in the treatment of patients with gastric ulcer based on embedded system[J]. Microprocess Microsyst, 2021, 81:103651. DOI: 10.1016/j.micpro.2020.103651. doi:10.1016/j.micpro.2020.103651
[11]	Datta J, Strong VE. Less may be more: shifting paradigm toward minimally invasive gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer[J]. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2019, 4:79. DOI: 10.21037/tgh.2019.09.12. doi:10.21037/tgh.2019.09.12
[12]	李卫威, 智晓玉, 胡毅. 晚期胃癌的治疗进展[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2019, 40(7):690-694. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2019.07.022. doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2019.07.022
[13]	Zhang C, Hou W, Huang J, et al. Effects of metastasectomy and other factors on survival of patients with ovarian metastases from gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Cell Biochem, 2019, 120(9):14486-14498. DOI: 10.1002/jcb.28708. doi:10.1002/jcb.28708pmid:31050365
[14]	Han HB, Lee KE, Choi JH. Functional dissociation of θ oscillations in the frontal and visual cortices and their long-range network during sustained attention[J]. eNeuro, 2019, 6(6): ENEURO.0248-19.2019. DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0248-19.2019. doi:10.1523/ENEURO.0248-19.2019
[15]	Zhang F, Yin Y, Ni T, et al. Treatment effect of apatinib combined chemotherapy as second-line or above therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction[J]. Pharmazie, 2020, 75(8):389-394. DOI: 10.1691/ph.2020.0403. doi:10.1691/ph.2020.0403
[16]	殷婷, 杨建奇, 陆园园. 晚期胃癌患者给予阿帕替尼联合化疗治疗的临床观察[J]. 当代医学, 2019, 25(25):66-68. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4393.2019.25.026. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1009-4393.2019.25.026
[17]	Li N, Bai C, Zhang R, et al. Efficacy and safety of apatinib for the treatment of AFP-producing gastric cancer[J]. Transl Oncol, 2021, 14(2):101004. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2020.101004. doi:10.1016/j.tranon.2020.101004
[18]	Zhou N, Zhang C, Liu D, et al. Apatinib in combination with S-1 as first-line treatment in patients with advanced metastatic gastric cancer: results from an open, exploratory, single-arm, phase Ⅱ trial[J]. Oncologist, 2021, 26(3):e374-e381. DOI: 10.1002/onco.13613. doi:10.1002/onco.13613pmid:33244809
[19]	汪斐, 刘佩, 黄雯, 等. 甲磺酸阿帕替尼对晚期胃癌患者临床疗效及预后的影响[J]. 国际感染病学(电子版), 2019, 8(3):93-94.
[20]	Gong X, Zhang H. Diagnostic and prognostic values of anti-helicobacter pylori antibody combined with serum CA724, CA19-9, and CEA for young patients with early gastric cancer[J]. J Clin Lab Anal, 2020, 34(7):e23268. DOI: 10.1002/jcla.23268. doi:10.1002/jcla.23268
[21]	Huang C, Xiao L, Luo HL, et al. Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio combined with serum CEA, CA19-9, CA125 and CA72-4 levels in the clinical pathological staging of gastric cancer-based on propensity score matching[J]. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents, 2020, 34(3):1111-1116. DOI: 10.23812/19-458-L-46. doi:10.23812/19-458-L-46
[22]	Tran TB, Worhunsky DJ, Squires MH, et al. To Roux or not to Roux: a comparison between Roux-en-Y and Billroth Ⅱ reconstruction following partial gastrectomy for gastric cancer[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2016, 19(3):994-1001. DOI: 10.1007/s10120-015-0547-3. doi:10.1007/s10120-015-0547-3