-
- 素材大。
- 7.47 MB
- 素材授權:
- 免費下載
- 素材格式:
- .ppt
- 素材上傳:
- chenrong
- 上傳時間:
- 2018-08-04
- 素材編號:
- 205081
- 素材類別:
- 生物課件PPT
-
素材預覽
這是頭頸部腫瘤分子生物學基礎ppt,包括了頭頸部腫瘤概述,口腔腫瘤,新輔助化療,2015 ASCO,流行病學,病因等內(nèi)容,歡迎點擊下載。
頭頸部腫瘤分子生物學基礎ppt是由紅軟PPT免費下載網(wǎng)推薦的一款生物課件PPT類型的PowerPoint.
劉 峰
2015.6.19
頭頸部腫瘤概述
口腔腫瘤
新輔助化療
2015 ASCO
流行病學
占全身惡性腫瘤的5%
第6大常見的惡性腫瘤
腫瘤相關死亡原因的第8位
頭頸部腫瘤的患者有可能罹患第2個原發(fā)性的頭頸部、肺部或食管的腫瘤
病因
吸煙和嗜酒
口咽癌:人乳頭瘤病毒(HPV) 60-70%
鼻咽癌:EBV
Human papillomavirus and survival of patients with oropharyngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 1;363(1):24-35.
頭頸部腫瘤特點
90%以上EGFR過表達
以鱗癌為主
視、聽、嗅覺、呼吸、發(fā)聲、進食、容貌
局部結(jié)構復雜、險隘,安全邊緣有限
“不可切除的病變” 沒有定義
不同部位特點不同
喉癌:聲門上區(qū)腫瘤在確診時通常已經(jīng)為局部晚期;但是聲門區(qū)腫瘤發(fā)現(xiàn)時多為早期,治愈率非常高:約80%~90%
咽癌:大約60%的下咽部腫瘤患者已屬局部晚期伴區(qū)域淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移,預后通常都很差
分期
唇部、口腔及口咽部腫瘤根據(jù)瘤體大小界定T分期
聲門區(qū)、聲門上區(qū)、喉咽及鼻咽部腫瘤根據(jù)各自亞區(qū)侵犯情況界定T分期
除了鼻咽癌的區(qū)域淋巴結(jié)(N)分期之外,對于不同部位腫瘤的N及遠處轉(zhuǎn)移(M)的界定標準是一致的
喉、口咽、下咽:VII區(qū)(上縱膈)轉(zhuǎn)移也被認為是區(qū)域淋巴結(jié)轉(zhuǎn)移
治療特點
T1-2N0M0期: 單純手術或單純放療
局部晚期: 手術+放療+化療
復發(fā)和轉(zhuǎn)移,姑息性化療放療+化療+手術
鼻咽癌主要以放化療為主
新輔助治療
例如:對可手術切除的局部晚期喉癌、咽癌,術前誘導化療/同步放化療不僅可以提高保喉率,而且可提高患者生存率
放療
原發(fā)病灶和受侵淋巴結(jié)需要每天2.0 Gy,總量為70 Gy或以上的劑量
對于頸部風險較低的淋巴結(jié)群的放療劑量為每天2.0 Gy,總量50 Gy或以上
化療
新輔助化療
同步放化療(根治性、輔助性)
輔助化療
姑息化療
靶向治療
西妥昔單抗
早中期:同步放療
晚 期:單藥或聯(lián)合化療
尼妥珠單抗(nimotuzumab)
吉非替尼、厄洛替尼:未觀察到臨床受益
不良預后因素
淋巴結(jié)包膜外受侵和/或手術切緣陽性:術后進行輔助性化放療
其他不良預后因素:多個陽性淋巴結(jié)(無包膜外受侵)、血管/淋巴管/神經(jīng)周圍侵犯、原發(fā)腫瘤T4a及具有IV區(qū)淋巴結(jié)陽性——術后放療,但是否進行放化療可根據(jù)臨床判斷
復發(fā)和(或)轉(zhuǎn)移
復發(fā)病變可治愈:應積極尋求根治性手術
或同步放化 (靶)療
無局部治愈可能:姑息性化療和(或)靶向治療
支持治療
Induction Chemotherapy
Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. The Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study GroupN Engl J Med. 1991;324(24):1685
332 pts
median follow-up of 33 months
surgery +radiotherapy
induction chemotherapy+ radiotherapy ± Salvage surgery
cisplatin +fluorouraci(PF)
Larynx preservation in pyriform sinus cancer: preliminary results of a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trial. EORTC Head and Neck Cancer Cooperative Group J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996
202 pts
surgery +radiotherapy
induction chemotherapy+ radiotherapy ± Salvage surgery
cisplatin +fluorouraci(PF)
Induction-chemotherapy arm vs. Surgery arm
TPF vs. PF
Induction chemotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil alone or in combination with docetaxel in locally advanced squamous-cell cancer of the head and neck: long-term results of the TAX 324 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(2):153-9
hypopharyngeal and laryngeal
Long-term results of GORTEC 2000-01: A multicentric randomized phase III trial of induction chemotherapy with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil, with or without docetaxel, for larynx preservation. France
213 pts
Median follow-up 105 months TPF vs. PF
The 5- and 10-year larynx preservation rates 74.0% vs. 58.1%
70.3% vs. 46.5%
The 5- and 10-year LDFFS rates 67.2% vs. 46.5%
63.7% vs. 37.2%
OS, PFS no difference
(LDFFS :larynx dysfunction-free survival)
Taxane-cisplatin-fluorouracil as induction chemotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis of the 5-year efficacy and safety. Springerplus. 2015;4:208.
7 randomized clinical (mata analysis) TPF vs. PF
3-year OS rate (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.25; P = 0.008)
3-year PFS rate (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.43; P = 0.002)
5-year OS rate (HR: 1.30; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.55;P = 0.003)
5-year PFS rate (HR: 1.39; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.70; P = 0.001)
The TPF induction chemotherapy improved PFS and OS compared with PF
Induction Chemotherapy vs. Concurrent ChemoRT
Long-Term Results of RTOG 91-11: A Comparison of ThreeNonsurgical Treatment Strategies to Preserve the Larynx inPatients With Locally Advanced Larynx Cancer J Clin Oncol 2013;31:845-852
Patients with stage III or IV glottic or supraglottic squamous cell cancer
laryngectomy-free survival (LFS)
For selected patients with hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancers less than T4a in extent, inductionchemotherapy—used as part of a larynx preservation strategy—is category 2A
Thus, induction chemotherapy has a category 3recommendation for the management of both locally and regionally advanced oropharyngeal cancer
Induction Chemotherapy in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Randomized Phase III Trial of Induction Chemotherapy With Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and Fluorouracil Followed by Surgery Versus Up-Front Surgery in Locally Advanced Resectable Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma J Clin Oncol. 2013 ;31(6):744-51
256 patients
Locallyadvanced Resectable Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma, TPF
Median follow-up of 30 months
Induction chemotherapy + Concurrent chemoradiotherapy
Induction chemotherapy followed by concurrentchemoradiotherapy (sequential chemoradiotherapy) versusconcurrent chemoradiotherapy alone in locally advanced headand neck cancer (PARADIGM): a randomised phase 3 trialLancet Oncol 2013; 14: 257–64
145 patients across 16 sites
Median follow-up of 49 months
Induction chemotherapy + Concurrent chemoradiotherapy
Concurrent chemoradiotherapy
Phase III randomized trial of induction chemotherapy in patients with N2 or N3 locally advanced head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32(25):2735
285 patients , with N2 or N3 disease
Follow-up of 30 months
Induction chemotherapy + Concurrent chemoradiotherapy
Concurrent chemoradiotherapy
NO difference: OS, Relapse-Free Survival , Distant Failure-Free Survival
Is there a role for induction chemotherapy in the setting of concomitant chemoradiation in locally advanced head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Meta-analysis, 5 RCTs ( 4 TPF, 1 PF )
1229 patients
Indu-chemotherapy + concomitant chemoradiation
concomitant chemoradiation
OS, PFS no difference have a trend
Disease control , CR
Imply that selected patients may benefit from the addition of induction chemotherapy
New aspects regarding the induction chemotherapy with TPF and radio chemotherapy in head and neck cancer Germany
Meta-analysis, 5 RCTs (TPF)
1060 patients, locally advanced
53.4% oropharyngeal, 17.3% hyopharyngeal, 6.4% laryngeal, 18.5% oral cavity , 4.4% other SCCHN
TPF + concomitant chemoradiation
concomitant chemoradiation
Not result in a significant improvement of OS (Hazard Ratio: 0.950, 0.791-1.140, p = 0.579)
Radiotherapy plus cetuximab
Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for locoregionally advanced head and neck cancer: 5-year survival data from a phase 3 randomised trial, and relation between cetuximab-induced rash and survival Lancet Oncol. 2010 ;11(1):21-8
424 pts: locoregionally advanced squamous-cell carcinoma (oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx)
73 centres
median follow-up 60 months
radiotherapy aloneradiotherapy plus cetuximab
OS: 49.0 months versus 29.3 months
5-year overall survival was 45.6% versus 36.4%
Randomized phase III trial of concurrent accelerated radiation plus cisplatin with or without cetuximab for stage III to IV head and neck carcinoma: RTOG 0522. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 20;32(27):2940-50.
891 analyzed patients
Median follow-up 3.8 years
Cetuximab plus cisplatin-radiation
cisplatin-radiation alone
3-year PFS (61.2% v. 58.9%, P = .76),
3-year OS (72.9% v. 75.8, P = .32)
p16-positive compared with p16-negative
PFS (72.8% v. 49.2%, P < .001)
OS (85.6% v. 60.1%, P < .001),
EGFR expression did not distinguish outcome
Should not be prescribed routinely
Oral Cavity
Very advanced
2015 ASCOHead and Neck Cancer
Phase III randomized trial of standard fractionation radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin versus accelerated fractionation radiotherapy with panitumumab in patients with locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: NCIC Clinical Trials Group HN.6 trialCanada
320 pts
With a median follow-up of 46.4 months
PFS of PMab +AFX was not superior to CIS +SFX
Weekly paclitaxel, carboplatin, cetuximab (PCC), and cetuximab, docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (C-TPF), followed by risk-based local therapy in previously untreated, locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) MD Anderson Cancer Center
phase II
Median follow-up of 18.4 months
136 patients
Mutational patterns of HPV + and HPV- squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (SCCHN) and their interference with outcome after adjuvant chemoradiation: A multicenter biomarker study of the German Cancer Consortium Radiation Oncology Group Germany
208 patients
211 exons from 45 genes
HPV +: enriched for activating mutations in driver genes (PIK3CA 27% , KRAS 8%, NRAS 4%, HRAS 2%)
HPV- :loss-of-function alterations in tumor suppressor genes (TP5367%, CDKN2A 30%, PTEN 4%, SMAD4 3%)
median follow-up of 55 months, loss-of-function tumor suppressor gene mutations negatively interfere with efficacy of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemoradiation, whereas activating driver gene mutations define poor risk specifically in HPV-driven SCCHN
Antitumor activity and safety of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: Preliminary results from KEYNOTE-012 expansion cohort Chicago
ORR(Objective Response Rate) was 18.2%
31.3% with stable disease
Biomarker analysis is ongoing
Final overall survival analysis of EXAM, an international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trial of cabozantinib (Cabo) in medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) patients with documented RECIST progression at baseline. France
是RET,VEGFR2和MET酪氨酸激酶的強效抑制劑,于2012年11月被美國FDA批準用于MTC的治療
median follow up time 52.4 mo
N= 330
median OS 26.6 mo vs 21.1 mo ( p = 0.241).
median OS 44.3 mo vs 18.9 mo (p = 0.026) , For 126 pts with RET M918T mutations
Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib for the treatment of patients with 131I-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer with and without prior VEGFtargeted therapy. London
PFS 18.3 vs. 3.6 mo
2015.4 FDA
Utilization and outcomes of low dose versus high dose cisplatin in head and neck cancer patients receiving concurrent radiation. Milwaukee
1,091 pts
LD ( ≤40 mg/m2) , HD ( ≥ 75 mg/m2)
The total cumulative dose 322.5 mg vs. 475.8 mg
OS favoring the HD group(log rank test, p <0.001)
75% censored in both cohorts
Differential impact of cisplatin dose intensity on human papillomavirus (HPV)-related ( + ) and HPV-unrelated ( - ) locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC). Canada (retrospective)
Median follow-up was 4.3 yrs
5 year OS was inferior for HPV( - )
CDDP ≤ 200 vs. >200 mg/m2 (44 % vs 62%, p < 0.01)
But not to HPV( +)
A meta-analysis of weekly cisplatin versus three weekly cisplatin chemotherapy plus current radiotherapy for advanced head and neck cancer. Yue Zhang Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
779 patients of 10 studies
Three weekly cisplatin CRT didn’t differ with weekly in OS and LRFS(locoregional recurrence-free survival)
A meta-analysis comparing cisplatin-based to carboplatin-based chemotherapy in moderate to advanced squamous cell carcinoma of head andneck (SCCHN). Qinyang Li, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
Patients with CDDP-based CT can achieve a higher OS, but there is no significant difference in LRC
Bioradiotherapy for head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma , Philadelphia
68 patients
Median follow-up 30 months
Phase II study with conventional radiotherapy + cetuximab in patients with advanced larynx cancer who responded to induction chemotherapy : An organ preservation TTCC study. Spain
93 patients , one arm
Median follow-up: 48 months
LEDFS(the laryngo-esophageal dysfunction–free survival ) rate was clearly higher than the critical value and with an acceptable toxicity with this protocol, so it is warranted to move to a phase III trial
The role of cetuximab in induction chemotherapy: Comparison of APF-C( nab-paclitaxel, cisplatin, 5-FU+ cetuximab) with APF, both followed by chemoradiation therapy (CRT), in patients with locally advanced head andneck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). St. Louis
Background: Cetuximab improved OS in patients with HNSCC when added to definitive RT or to palliative chemotherapy
60 pts
Two year OS and DSS(disease-specific survival) were similar between APF+C and APF, even when stratified for p16 status.
Concurrent chemoradiation using weekly versus tri-weekly cisplatin in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN): A comparative analysis. Atlanta
Out of 120 studies, 23 with a total of 2,303 patients
Weekly cisplatin combined with radiation in locally advanced SCCHN is comparable in efficacy and safety to tri-weekly based regimens.
總結(jié)
個體化治療,綜合和治療
對部分選擇的患者,誘導化療是可行的,在局部疾病控制、器官保留方面可以帶來益處,能降低遠處轉(zhuǎn)移發(fā)生率,并有可能轉(zhuǎn)化為生存獲益
誘導化療仍缺乏有效的篩選標記
靶向治療,特別是免疫治療未來會帶來突破
THANKS
同步放化療隨機臨床試驗支持幾種順鉑的使用方案(例如每周,每天,但大多數(shù)醫(yī)療中心采用高劑量順鉑治療(每3周100 mg/m2)
口腔癌
口腔癌
鼻咽癌
在頭頸部腫瘤中,它具有最高的遠處轉(zhuǎn)移傾向。局部晚期鼻咽癌在根治性放療(未行化療)后很容易出現(xiàn)孤性局部復發(fā)。區(qū)域復發(fā)不常見,僅占患者的10%~19%
治療前血清/血漿中EBV-DNA水平與早期鼻咽癌(I期和II期)的預后有關,治療前血漿EBV-DNA水平越高,則治療后出現(xiàn)遠地轉(zhuǎn)移的概率越高
聯(lián)合使用放療和鉑類藥物化療已被證實腫瘤的局部控制率可以從54%增加到78%
鼻咽部腫瘤患者治療后,推薦的隨訪內(nèi)容包括定期體檢和甲狀腺功能的評估(每6~12個月檢測TSH水平)
在20%~25%的接受頸部放療的患者當中可檢測出TSH水平增高
鼻咽癌
初始治療決策
手術
放療
同步放化療
新輔助化療
pembrolizumab是西妥昔單抗療效(10~13%)的約兩倍
EGFR-抑制劑在HPV-陽性腫瘤中療效不佳
pembrolizumab在HPV-陽性和HPV-陰性腫瘤中均有相似活性水平
緩解率可能低估患者的獲益比例
病情穩(wěn)定或即使最初經(jīng)歷疾病進展的患者一旦接受免疫治療最終可能變?yōu)殚L期生存期的獲益
Nonetheless, interest in the role of induction chemotherapy was renewed several years ago for a few reasons
Advances in surgery, RT, and concurrent systemic therapy/RT have yielded improvements in local/regional control
thus, the role of distant metastases as a source of treatment failure has increased and induction chemotherapy allows greater drug delivery for this purpose
Most randomized trials of inductionchemotherapy followed by RT and/or surgery compared to locoregional treatment alone, which were published in the 1980s and 1990s, did not show an improvement in overall survival with the incorporationof chemotherapy.273
in selected patients, induction chemotherapy couldfacilitate organ preservation, avoid morbid surgery, and improve overall quality of life of the patient even though overall survival was not improved.
Because total laryngectomy is among the procedures mostfeared by patients,281 larynx preservation was the focus of initial studies
誘導化療治療頭頸鱗癌的爭議 上海交通大學醫(yī)學院附屬第九人民醫(yī)院 鄭家偉發(fā)布時間:2007-5-2 11:24:40 頭頸部由于特殊的解剖部位和復雜的功能,給惡性腫瘤的治療提出了挑戰(zhàn)。早期頭頸癌,無論采用手術或放療,均能獲得良好的效果,無需多手段治療;但遺憾的是,60%的頭頸癌就診時已屬晚期(III、IV期),5年生存率徘徊在10%~20%之間。
對大多數(shù)局部晚期、腫瘤無法切除及需器官保存的腫瘤患者,目前公認的標準治療是同期化放療。對腫瘤復發(fā)或遠處轉(zhuǎn)移的患者,如果腫瘤對鉑類或紫杉醇類藥物治療不敏感,則只能給予患者支持治療。
誘導化療(induction chemotherapy)是指手術或放療前進行的化療,又稱為新輔助化療(neoadjuvant chemotherapy),作為腫瘤化學治療的一種方式,用于頭頸鱗癌已有近30年的歷史,但其在腫瘤治療中的確切作用一直頗受爭議。爭論的焦點是在提高局部控制率和生存率方面的確切作用,爭議產(chǎn)生的主要原因,是其理論上明顯的優(yōu)勢與以往臨床試驗顯示誘導化療對患者生存率沒有明顯改善之間的矛盾。文獻報道的各種誘導化療方案的隨機對照試驗(RCT)結(jié)果不一,有些稱顯著有效,有些則認為無效,但多數(shù)研究認為,PF誘導化療雖然暫時有效甚至顯效,但不能顯著提高這類患者的遠期生存率。
屠規(guī)益教授認為:從臨床醫(yī)師的角度而言,我們要求的是確實(有“根治性”)有效的實用方案,可以在臨床上重復應用。迄今為止,化療在惡性腫瘤尤其是造血系統(tǒng)腫瘤的治療中已經(jīng)發(fā)揮了很大作用。但是,無論是新藥還是常規(guī)藥物、無論是單藥還是多種藥物聯(lián)合應用、無論是單獨化療或綜合(放療、手術)應用,對頭頸鱗癌尚沒有確切的“根治性療效”,尚沒有確實可以加強其他治療手段的結(jié)果報告。建議目前臨床上不宜對頭頸鱗癌患者常規(guī)應用化療作為根治性治療或輔助措施。China J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2006,4(3):162-165.
Marshall R. Posner 教授(Dana Farber癌癥研究所,波士頓 馬薩諸塞,美國)認為:聯(lián)合應用順鉑與5-氟尿嘧啶一直被視為標準新輔助治療,術前化療能夠降低腫瘤的遠處轉(zhuǎn)移率,但其在提高患者生存率方面并沒有足夠證據(jù)。China J Oral Maxillofac Surg,2006,4(5):322-329.
目前的結(jié)論
誘導化療對提高腫瘤局部控制率的作用:最初將誘導化療應用于頭頸晚期鱗癌的治療,目的是為了提高局部控制率,達到提高生存率的目的。但臨床研究中并沒有足夠的證據(jù)表明,誘導化療能夠有效提高手術對頭頸部鱗癌的控制率。這是因為局部控制率的提高,一方面依賴于誘導化療的療效,量效不夠的誘導化療、腫瘤對化學藥物的低反應率反而影響了局部治療的效果;另一方面,頭頸晚期鱗癌是異質(zhì)性非常大的一族疾病群,手術治療的效果在很大程度上決定于患者的發(fā)病部位、病變范圍以及周圍的解剖關系。
誘導化療對遠處轉(zhuǎn)移的抑制作用:有效地減少遠處轉(zhuǎn)移率,是誘導化療對腫瘤治療的一大優(yōu)勢。Paccagnella等通過以順鉑和5-氟尿嘧啶為基礎的誘導化療治療晚期頭頸鱗癌,將3年遠處轉(zhuǎn)移率由38%降到14%(P=0.002)。退伍軍人事務部喉癌研究組(Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group)開展的通過誘導化療達到器官保留目的的III期隨機試驗也發(fā)現(xiàn),PF方案(順鉑,第1天100mg/m2;第1~5天,5-氟尿嘧啶1000mg/m2持續(xù)輸注)的誘導化療組較少地發(fā)生遠處轉(zhuǎn)移。
術前誘導化療在頭頸腫瘤治療中的角色轉(zhuǎn)變
進展1——新藥開發(fā)和聯(lián)合用藥方案:誘導化療的研究進展主要表現(xiàn)在新藥的開發(fā)和聯(lián)合用藥方案的篩選,值得推薦的是紫杉醇類、順鉑和5-氟尿嘧啶三聯(lián)新誘導化療方案(TPF)的應用。Vermorken等進行的臨床III期試驗,評價了PF誘導化療方案(第1天,順鉑100mg/m2;第1~5天,5-氟尿嘧啶1000mg/m2 )與加入多烯紫杉醇(docetaxel)的TPF方案(第1天,多烯紫杉醇75 mg/m2,順鉑75mg/m2;第1~5天,5-氟尿嘧啶750mg/ m2)的療效。選擇358例無法手術切除的患者(PF組181例、TPF組177例)接受3個療程的誘導化療后進行放射治療,三聯(lián)用藥有明顯高的總有效率(67.8%∶53.6%)及更長的無進展生存時間和總生存時間,并且具有更好的耐受性和較低的中毒死亡發(fā)生率(5.5%∶2.3%),從而使誘導化療在頭頸癌中的作用得到重新認識。
進展2——同期化放療:過去20 年內(nèi), 大量的臨床隨機試驗(RCT ) 表明,同期化放療(concomitant chemoradio therapy) 可顯著提高病人的無瘤生存率和總生存率, 減輕術后畸形, 并保存器官功能。最近的2 項Meta 分析已證實了上述觀點。 同期化放療與單純放療相比較,約提高10%~20%的生存率,但對遠處轉(zhuǎn)移率的控制效果較差。鄭家偉,邱蔚六,王中和. 同期化放療治療晚期頭頸癌.口腔頜面外科雜志, 2001,11(3): 241-244.
進展3——西妥昔單抗:新近的研究表明,大多數(shù)頭頸鱗癌細胞過表達表皮生長因子受體(EGFR),此受體為酪氨酸激酶膜受體,能夠誘導血管生成,促進腫瘤生長,且與腫瘤對治療的抵抗有關。針對EGFR,英克。↖mClone Systems)、百時美施貴寶(Bristol-Myers Squibb)和德國默克里昂制藥公司(Merck KgaA)聯(lián)合開發(fā)出新的抗癌藥物西妥昔單抗(Cetuximab,Erbitux,c225),2006年3月1日,該藥獲得美國FDA批準,允許上市和臨床使用,為晚期無法手術切除的頭頸鱗癌患者帶來了生存的希望。
作為一種單克隆抗體,Cetuximab的作用方式與標準的非選擇性化學治療不同,因其特異性抑制EGFR。這種抑制會防止受體及隨之而來的信號轉(zhuǎn)導通路被啟動,進而減少腫瘤細胞對正常組織的侵襲以及腫瘤向新部位的擴散。Cetuximab還能抑制腫瘤細胞修復化療和放療造成的損傷,并抑制腫瘤內(nèi)部新血管的形成,從多條途徑抑制腫瘤細胞的生長。
西妥昔單抗對晚期結(jié)腸癌有效,也被FDA批準用于化療失敗的復發(fā)性和(或)發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移的頭頸部鱗癌患者。法國 Gustave Roussy研究所的Bourhis等〔J Clin Oncol,2006,24(18):2866-2872〕在43例患者所做的II期臨床試驗表明,Cetuximab聯(lián)合順鉑或卡鉑及FU對復發(fā)或發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)移的晚期頭頸鱗癌患者有效,患者耐受性好,總反應率為36%。美國伯明翰亞拉巴馬大學醫(yī)學部Bonner等〔N Engl J Med,2006,354(6):567-578〕在424例患者進行的III期多中心臨床試驗表明,與單純放療相比(中位生存時間29.3個月),西妥昔單抗聯(lián)合大劑量放射治療能夠顯著提高局部-區(qū)域晚期的頭頸鱗癌患者的生存時間(中位生存時間49.0個月),降低并發(fā)癥率。因此,對局部晚期病變,以及復發(fā)或發(fā)生遠處轉(zhuǎn)移的頭頸鱗癌患者,如果順鉑治療無效,則西妥昔或許為有效治療方法。
該藥常見的不良反應主要包括輸注部位反應(發(fā)熱和寒戰(zhàn))、皮疹、疲勞、不適和惡心等。
未來解決爭議的方法
(1)多中心、前瞻性RCT研究:標準誘導化療與同期化放療的療效比較,三聯(lián)方案(PF+多烯紫杉醇或紫杉醇)與PF方案、同期化放療的療效比較,序列治療方案與標準治療的療效比較。
(2)循證醫(yī)學系統(tǒng)評價:當前比較迫切的任務是,對國內(nèi)外已發(fā)表的誘導化療治療晚期頭頸鱗癌的相關RCT論文進行系統(tǒng)評價(利用 Revmanager軟件),獲得具有說服力的循證醫(yī)學證據(jù),供廣大臨床醫(yī)師參考。
這些試驗將可能為化療在局部晚期頭頸腫瘤患者治療中的作用,確立一個新的位置。隨著更為有效的全身用化療藥物的出現(xiàn),誘導化療的效果將會令人刮目相看。顱底腫瘤ppt:這是顱底腫瘤ppt,包括了概述,顱神經(jīng),臨床表現(xiàn),治療,術前準備,并發(fā)癥,護理要點等內(nèi)容,歡迎點擊下載。
縱隔腫瘤ppt:這是縱隔腫瘤ppt,包括了縱隔的解剖與分區(qū),縱隔腫瘤的好發(fā)部位,臨床表現(xiàn),診斷,治療等內(nèi)容,歡迎點擊下載。
腫瘤基因檢測ppt:這是腫瘤基因檢測ppt,包括了背景知識介紹,靶向用藥指導基因檢測,化療用藥指導基因檢測,常見腫瘤個體化用藥基因檢測,其他腫瘤產(chǎn)品等內(nèi)容,歡迎點擊下載。