摘要
目的:贝伐单抗(BVZ)是靶向于血管内皮生长因子A的抗肿瘤药物,有大量研究证实BVZ可通过抑制肿瘤血管内皮生成,达到放化疗增敏的作用,然而也有研究持反对观点。本研究旨在评价BVZ参与治疗脑胶质瘤的治疗方案和疗效,为临床决策和临床研究提供参考依据。方法:检索Medline、Embase和BIOSIS数据库,查找所有有关脑胶质瘤治疗的文献,采用软件SAS进行分析。结果:共纳入54篇文献。分析发现:在新诊断胶质瘤中BVZ与替莫唑胺(TMZ)或伊立替康(CPT-11)联用,半年无进展生存率和中位无进展生存期均显著高于TMZ单药治疗,复发性胶质瘤中BVZ与CPT-11联用,半年无进展生存率显著高于TMZ单药治疗和BVZ联用TMZ治疗。结论:新诊断脑胶质瘤使用BVZ联用TMZ或CPT-11相较于TMZ单药可提高治疗效果。目前虽然脑胶质瘤患者的生存期并未得到显著提高,BVZ与CPT-11联用很大程度上可改善复发性脑胶质瘤的治疗,具有重要的研究意义。
AIM： To compare the clinical effects and treatment regimens of brain glioblastom treated with concomitant or adjuvant bevacizumab（ BVZ） chemotherapy and without BVZ,aiming to provide reference for clinical treatment and clinical research.METHODS： By searching Medline,Embase and BIOSIS,the studies were included if they were in accordance with inclusion criteria.Data were analyzed using SAS.RESULTS： 54 studies were included.Analysis results were as follows： in newlydiagnosed GBM,the FPS-6 of the group received BVZ combined with TMZ or CPT-11 chemotherapy was higher than that in the group received TMZ only.In recurrent GBM,the FPS-6 of the group received BVZ combined with CPT-11 chemotherapy was higher than that in the groups received TMZ with BVZ or not,the differences were both statistically significant.Compared with the recurrent GBM,the media overall survival of the groups received TMZ alone,BVZ with CPT-11 and all BVZ chemotherapy was significantly higher in newly-diagnosed GBM.Moreover,the media-FPS in the TMZ alone group was significantly lower than BVZ,BVZ with TMZ and CPT-11 groups in newly-diagnosed GBM.CONCLUSION： The treatment regimen of BVZ combined with TMZ has better therapeutic effect than TMZ alone in recurrent GBM.Although the overall survival of GBM patients has not been significantly improved at present, BVZ combined with CPT-11 can largely improve the treatment of glioma,and has important research significance.
出处
《中国临床药理学与治疗学》
CAS
CSCD
2016年第1期64-70,共7页
Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
基金
国家自然科学基金(81572946)
关键词
脑胶质瘤
贝伐单抗
系统评价
glioblastoma
bevacizumab
systematic review
