Ⅲ期老年胃癌患者根治术后单药与多药辅助化疗的疗效分析

Efficacy analysis of single-agent versus multi-agent adjuvant chemotherapy after radical gastrec-tomy for elderly patients with stage gastric cancer

  • 摘要:
    目的 比较Ⅲ期老年胃癌患者根治术后单药与多药辅助化疗的疗效。
    方法 采用倾向评分匹配及回顾性队列研究方法。收集2016年1月至2020年12月上海交通大学医学院附属仁济医院收治的456例行D2根治术Ⅲ期老年胃癌患者的临床病理资料;男343例,女113例;年龄为71(65~89)岁。456例患者中,274例术后行单药辅助化疗设为单药化疗组;182例术后行两药或三药辅助化疗设为多药化疗组。观察指标:(1)倾向评分匹配情况及匹配后两组患者一般资料比较。(2)化疗期间不良事件。(3)随访情况。倾向评分匹配按1∶1匹配,卡钳值设置为0.05。正态分布的计量资料以x±s表示,组间比较采用t检验。偏态分布的计量资料以M(范围)表示。计数资料以绝对数表示,组间比较采用χ²检验或Fisher确切概率法。等级资料组间比较采用非参数秩和检验。采用Kaplan‑Meier法绘制生存曲线并计算生存率,Log‑Rank检验进行生存分析。
    结果 (1)倾向评分匹配情况及匹配后两组患者一般资料比较。456例患者中,306例配对成功,单药化疗组和多药化疗组各153例。倾向评分匹配后,消除年龄、年龄校正查尔森合并症指数、病理学TNM分期因素混杂偏倚,具有可比性。(2)化疗期间不良事件。单药化疗组和多药化疗组患者血液学不良事件中性粒细胞减少症分别为6例和16例,两组比较,差异有统计学意义(χ²=4.90,P<0.05)。单药化疗组患者非血液学不良事件食欲减退、恶心分别为77、50例,多药化疗组患者上述指标分别为96、69例,两组比较,差异均有统计学意义(χ²=4.80,4.96,P<0.05)。(3)随访情况。306例患者均获得随访,随访时间为48(8~61)个月。单药化疗组和多药化疗组患者5年总生存率分别为36.08%和38.31%,两组比较,差异无统计学意义(风险比=0.93,95%可信区间为0.70~1.20,P>0.05)。进一步研究结果显示:单药化疗组97例患者与多药化疗组中97例两药化疗患者5年总生存率分别为32.41%和39.40%,两者比较,差异无统计学意义(风险比=1.20,95%可信区间为0.82~1.70,P>0.05)。单药化疗组56例患者与多药化疗组中56例三药化疗患者5年总生存率分别为43.15%和37.11%,两者比较,差异无统计学意义(风险比=0.81,95%可信区间为0.65~1.00,P>0.05)。
    结论 与单药口服化疗比较,Ⅲ期老年胃癌患者根治术后行两药或三药辅助化疗的预后无明显优势,且中性粒细胞减少症、食欲减退和恶心发生比例更高。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective To compare the efficacy of single-agent versus multi-agent adjuvant chemotherapy after radical gastrectomy for elderly patients with stage Ⅲ gastric cancer.
    Methods The propensity score matching and retrospective cohort study were conducted. The clinicopatholo-gical data of 456 elderly patients with stage Ⅲ gastric cancer who underwent D2 radical resection in the Renji Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine from January 2016 to December 2020 were collected. There were 343 males and 113 females, aged 71(range, 65‒89)years. Of the 456 patients, 274 cases undergoing single-agent adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery were divided into single-agent chemotherapy group, 182 cases undergoing double-agent or triple-agent adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery were divided into multi-agent chemotherapy group. Observa-tion indicators: (1) propensity score matching and comparison of general data of patients between the two groups after matching; (2) adverse events during chemotherapy; (3) follow-up. Propensity score matching was done by the 1∶1 ratio, with the caliper value of 0.05. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean±SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M(range). Count data were described as absolute numbers, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Comparison of ordinal data between groups was conducted using the non-parameter rank sum test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw survival curves and calculate survival rates, and the Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis.
    Results (1) Propensity score matching and comparison of general data of patients between the two groups after matching. Of 456 patients, 306 cases were successfully matched, including 153 cases in the single-agent chemotherapy group and 153 cases in the multi-agent chemotherapy group. The elimination of age, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, pathological TNM staging confounding bias ensured comparability between the two groups after propensity score matching. (2) Adverse events during chemotherapy. In terms of hematological adverse events, 6 cases in the single-agent chemotherapy group and 16 cases in the multi-agent chemotherapy group had neutropenia, showing a significant difference in the neutropenia (χ²=4.90, P<0.05). In terms of non-hematological adverse events, cases with anorexia and nausea were 77 and 50 for the single-agent chemotherapy group, versus 96 and 69 for the multi-agent chemotherapy group, showing significant differences between the two groups (χ²=4.80, 4.96, P<0.05). (3)Follow-up. All the 306 patients were followed up for 48(range, 8‒61)months. The 5-year overall survival rates of the single-agent chemotherapy group and the multi-agent chemotherapy group were 36.08% and 38.31%, respectively, showing no significant difference between the two groups (hazard ratio=0.93, 95% confidence interval as 0.70‒1.20, P>0.05). Results of further analysis showed that the 5-year overall survival rates were 32.41% and 39.40% for 97 patients of the single-agent chemotherapy group and 97 patients with double-agent regimen of the multi-agent chemotherapy group, respectively, showing no significant difference between them (hazard ratio=1.20, 95% confidence interval as 0.82‒1.70, P>0.05). The 5-year overall survival rates were 43.15% and 37.11% for 56 patients of the single-agent chemotherapy group and 56 patients with triple-agent regimen of the multi-agent chemotherapy group, respectively, showing no significant difference between them (hazard ratio=0.81, 95% confidence interval as 0.65‒1.00, P>0.05).
    Conclusions For adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients with stage Ⅲ gastric cancer, there is no significant survival advantage of double-agent or triple-agent chemotherapy over single-agent oral chemotherapy. However, there is a higher incidence of neutropenia, anorexia, ausea.

     

/

返回文章
返回