实体瘤经皮注射抗癌乳疗效观察.docVIP

实体瘤经皮注射抗癌乳疗效观察 　　摘要：目的 进一步探索和观察抗癌乳的抗癌效果和临床应用安全性。拓宽其临床应用范围。方法 我科对63例实体瘤经皮穿刺注射抗癌乳，4w后复查，用WHO对实体瘤的疗效评价标准，评判其疗效；再与文献报道的实体瘤经皮植入放射微粒125I 的临床对应指标相比较。进一步明确抗癌乳对实体瘤的临床治疗价值和优势。结果 本组63例中，RR 76.18% CBR 93.64%。获得平均6个月PFS。与125I微粒比较，两者有效率为76.18% VS （73.14%～77.8%），PFS、本组平均6个月，与文献报道的125I粒子植入术后，累计91.67%患者无进展生存期为6月比较，极为相近。差异无统计学意义。结论 抗癌乳与125I微粒比较，两者有效率和无进展生存期极为相近，无统计学差异。但在更加廉价易得、保存储运和使用安全方便等方面，抗癌乳则更具优势。在基层医院更适合于无手术指征实体瘤患者的治疗。 　　关键词：实体瘤；经皮穿刺；抗癌乳；化学消融；放射微粒125I 　　Abstract：Objective Further exploration and observation of anticancer milk anti-cancer effect and safety for clinical application. To broaden the scope of clinical application. Methods In our department， 63 patients with solid tumors by percutaneous injection of anticancer milk， after 4 weeks，the standard to evaluate the effect of solid tumors with WHO， to judge its curative effect； then with the reported solid tumor by clinical corresponding index skin implanted radioactive particles 125I compared. To further clarify the anticancer milk for solid tumors in the clinical value and advantages. Results The 63 patients， RR 76.18% CBR 93.64%. For an average of 6 months PFS. With 125I particles implantation compared， The RR of 76.18% VS （73.14%～77.8%），PFS，In this group， with an average of 6 months. Compared 125I particle implantation was reported in the literature， a total of 91.67% patients were progression free survival was June， very close. No significant differences. Conclusion Anticancer milk compared with 125I particles， both efficient and progression free survival is very similar， no statistical difference. But in the more cheap and easy to get， save storage and safe and convenient use etc.， anticancer milkis more advantage. In the basic level hospital is more suitable for non operation treatment syndrome in patients with solid tumors. 　　Key words：Solid tumors；Percutaneous puncture；Anticancer milk；Chemical ablation；Radioactive particles 125I 　　近年来，实体瘤的局部治疗方法，竞相进入临床，各显特色。物理消融：微波、热疗、冷冻、超声、射频、组织间插放疗（125I微粒植入）、光动力学等。均有收效，但多存很大局限