恒瑞医疗 网址: www.hrmedical.com.cn

专业文献

deb-ag捕鱼平台

文字: 2017-4-18    浏览次数:1844    

objective: conflicting results of the efficacy and safety of conventional  transarterial chemo-embolization (ctace) vs drug-eluting bead (deb)-tace have been reported. this meta-analysis aimed to update and re-evaluate the efficacy and safety of ctace compared with those of deb-tace in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (hcc).

        目的:已有临床研究显示传统经动脉化疗栓塞术(ctace)与可载药微球tace(deb-tace)在临床疗效和安全性方面的结果存在矛盾。本meta分析旨在对ctace与deb-tace治疗肝细胞癌(hcc)的临床疗效和安全性进行更新和再评价。


       methods: literature search was performed by two investigators independently in pubmed, medline and embase to screen studies published from january 1990 to march 2015. studies of parallel group designs comparing ctace and deb-tace for hcc were reviewed. complete response, partial response, objective response,disease control, overall survival and survival time were collected to evaluate the efficacy of each therapy.

       方法:两个研究者分别在pubmed、medline、embase数据库中检索1990年1月至2015年3月间发表的关于deb-tace与ctace治疗hcc的平行对照研究。收集完全应答率、部分应答率、客观应答率、疾病控制率、总生存期和生存时间的数据以评估两种治疗方法的疗效。


       results: deb-tace increased the complete response rate [odds ratio (or)1.38, 95% confidence interval (ci) 1.01–1.89], overall survival rate (or 1.41,95% ci 1.01–1.98) and survival time [weighted mean difference (wmd) 6.65, 95% ci 6.15–7.14) with less common adverse events (or 0.59, 95% ci 0.41– 0.84).however, deb-tace had a similar partial response rate (or 1.00, 95% ci 0.67–1.49),objective response rate (or 1.21, 95% ci 0.94–1.56), disease control rate (or1.14, 95% ci 0.81–1.58) and serious adverse events (or 0.86, 95% ci 0.50–1.49)compared with ctace.

       结果:deb-tace能够增加肿瘤完全应答率[优势比(or)1.38, 95%置信区间(ci)1.01-1.89)]、总生存率(or 1.41, 95% ci1.01-1.98)和生存时间[加权均数差(wmd)6.65, 95% ci 6.15-7.14)]同时较少发生常见不良反应(or 0.59, 95% ci0.41-0.84)。然而,deb-tace与ctace在肿瘤部分应答率(or 1.00, 95% ci 0.67-1.49)、客观应答率(or 1.21, 95% ci0.94-1.56)、疾病控制率(or 1.14, 95% ci 0.81-1.58)及严重不良事件发生(or 0.86, 95%ci0.50-1.49)方面无显著差异。


         conclusions: deb-tace has a higher complete response rate and a higher overall survival rate in patients with hcc than ctace; however, the results should be interpreted with caution. furthermore, deb-tace is safer and has less common adverse events than ctace.

        结论:相较ctace,deb-tace可获得较高的肿瘤完全应答率和总生存率;然而,对结果的解读应该慎重。此外,deb-tace很安全,常见不良事件发生也比ctace少。