非肌层浸润性膀胱癌术后应用吉西他滨与吡柔比星灌注化疗疗效比较
Comparison of the Efficacy of Postoperative Gemcitabine versus Pirarubicin Perfusion Chemotherapy for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.131136, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 254  浏览: 382 
作者: 万文杰, 刘永辉:潍坊医学院临床医学院,山东 潍坊;杨金辉, 侯晓娜, 王明月, 盖新宇, 成 波*:胜利油田中心医院,山东 东营
关键词: 膀胱肿瘤灌注化疗吉西他滨吡柔比星复发不良反应Bladder Neoplasms Infusion Chemotherapy Gemcitabine Pirarubicin Recurrence Adverse Reaction
摘要: 目的:比较非肌层浸润性膀胱癌(NMIBC)行经尿道膀胱肿瘤电切术(TURBT)后应用吉西他滨灌注化疗与应用吡柔比星灌注化疗疗效及不良反应。方法:回顾性分析2014年1月至2017年6月间就诊于胜利油田中心医院泌尿外科的NMIBC患者,所选患者均行TURBT,术后应用吉西他滨灌注化疗的患者设为观察组(72例),应用吡柔比星灌注化疗的患者设为对照组(70例)。两组患者均于术后24小时内即刻开始膀胱灌注化疗,术后第1周开始持续膀胱灌注化疗,每周1次,持续8周;此后每月1次,持续1年。随访5年时间,观察记录两组患者复发率、进展率以及不良反应情况。采用Kaplan-Meier法比较术后肿瘤无复发和无进展生存时间。结果:本研究共纳入142例NMIBC的患者,随访5年中无死亡病例。观察组与对照组5年的复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);而观察组术后1年、2年、3年、4年复发率明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);观察组与对照组5年的进展率比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);观察组的不良反应明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:对于NMIBC患者,术后应用吉西他滨灌注化疗治疗相较于应用吡柔比星滨灌注化疗在术后4年内具有更显著的效果,复发率更低,不良反应更少,但是在术后5年两者的复发率差异无统计学意义。
Abstract: Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse reactions of gemcitabine infusion chemotherapy and pirarubicin infusion chemotherapy after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Methods: The patients with NMIBC who attended the Department of Urology of Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital between January 2014 and June 2017 were retrospectively analyzed, and those who applied gemcitabine infusion chemotherapy after surgery were set as the observation group (72 patients), and those who applied pirarubicin infusion chemotherapy were set as the control group (70 patients). Patients in both groups started bladder perfusion chemotherapy within 24 hours immediately after surgery, and continued bladder perfu-sion chemotherapy once a week for 8 weeks from the first week after surgery, and once a month for 1 year thereafter. The recurrence rate, progression rate and adverse effects were recorded in both groups at a follow-up period of 5 years. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare tumor re-currence-free and progression-free survival times after surgery. Results: A total of 142 patients with NMIBC were included in this study, and there were no deaths during the 5-year follow-up. The difference between the 5-year recurrence rate of the observation group and the control group was not statistically significant (P > 0.05); while the recurrence rate of the observation group was signif-icantly lower than that of the control group at 1, 2, 3 and 4 years after surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05); the difference between the 5-year progression rate of the ob-servation group and the control group was not statistically significant (P > 0.05); the adverse reac-tions of the observation group were significantly lower than that of the control group, and the dif-ference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusions: In patients with NMIBC, postoperative treatment with gemcitabine infusion chemotherapy had a more significant effect with lower recur-rence rates and fewer adverse effects compared with pirarubicin infusion chemotherapy at 4 years postoperatively, but the recurrence rates were not statistically significant at 5 years postoperative-ly.
文章引用:万文杰, 杨金辉, 侯晓娜, 王明月, 盖新宇, 刘永辉, 成波. 非肌层浸润性膀胱癌术后应用吉西他滨与吡柔比星灌注化疗疗效比较[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(1): 953-959. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.131136

1. 引言

膀胱癌是泌尿生殖系统中最常见的肿瘤之一,全世界超过160万人患有膀胱癌,是男性第四大最常见的恶性肿瘤,是女性常见的恶性肿瘤之一。2022年美国预计新发膀胱癌患者达到了81,180例,其中有17,100人会死于膀胱癌 [1]。根据肿瘤浸润膀胱壁的深度,膀胱癌可分为肌层浸润性膀胱癌(muscle invasive bladder cancer, MIBC)和非肌层浸润性膀胱癌(non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, NMIBC),其中NMIBC占初发膀胱癌的75% [2],NMIBC最常应用的治疗手段是经尿道膀胱肿瘤电切术(transurethral resection of bladder tumor, TURBT)。TURBT术后30%~60%的患者会复发,NMIBC最终发展为MIBC或转移性膀胱癌的概率约为10%~15% [3],提高膀胱癌患者预后的关键的环节是预防膀胱癌术后的复发和进展。术后多应用化疗药物进行膀胱灌注预防复发,膀胱内灌注化疗药物可使TURBT术后NMIBC近期复发率下降15%~20%,远期复发率下降6%左右 [4],然而膀胱灌注伴随许多不良反应,包括膀胱刺激征、血尿、发热、寒颤等 [5],所以选择一种安全有效的化疗药物对降低膀胱癌的复发率具有十分重要的意义 [6]。吉西他滨和吡柔比星是目前临床上针对膀胱癌的主流化疗药物,本研究在于探究吉西他滨和吡柔比星应用于非肌层浸润性膀胱癌患者术后灌注疗效及不良反应。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

选取2014年1月至2017年6月间就诊于胜利油田中心医院泌尿外科的NMIBC患者,其中观察组72名患者,对照组为70名患者。观察组患者男性60例,女性12例;最大年龄72岁,最小年龄57岁,平均年龄(63.5 ± 7.1),其中≤65岁患者54名,>65岁患者18名;肿瘤大小:<3 cm 53例,≥3 cm 19例;肿瘤数量:单发50例,多发22例;肿瘤位置:前壁23,后壁13,侧壁16,顶部11,底部9;肿瘤分级:低级别62例,高级别10例;肿瘤分期:Ta期43例,T1期29例。对照组患者男性57例,女性13例;最大年龄73岁,最小年龄54岁,平均年龄(62.9 ± 6.9),其中≤65岁患者51名,>65岁患者19名;肿瘤直径:<3 cm 49例,≥3 cm 21例;肿瘤数量:单发43例,多发27例。肿瘤位置:前壁19,后壁17,侧壁15,顶部13,底部6;肿瘤分级:低级别57例,高级别13例;肿瘤分期:Ta期46例,T1期24例。两组间一般资料差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。本研究已通过我院伦理委员会审批。

2.2. 纳入及排除标准

1) 纳入标准:① 患者均经病理切片诊断为非肌层浸润性膀胱癌;② 患者均无其他恶性肿瘤疾病;③ 患者均无研究药物过敏或禁忌;④ 患者均有完整的随访资料。2) 排除标准:① 失访患者;② 严重的肝肾功能不全、心肺功能障碍者;③ 合并其他泌尿系统疾病者;④ 术中出现严重膀胱穿孔者。

2.3. 灌注方法

两组患者均于术后24小时即刻开始膀胱灌注,指导患者排空膀胱并取平卧截石位,观察组选取1000 mg吉西他滨(齐鲁制药(海南)有限公司) + 50 ml生理盐水,对照组选取30 mg吡柔比星(瀚晖制药有限公司) + 50 ml 5%葡萄糖溶液,经硅胶导尿管灌注后,每隔15分钟变化体位,依次是仰卧位、右侧卧位、俯卧位及左侧卧位,共持续1小时后排出。两组患者每周1次膀胱灌注,持续8周。此后每月1次,持续1年。

2.4. 随访方式

术后第1年每3个月进行一次复查,每次复查均行膀胱镜检查、超声检查和尿液细胞学检查,第2年和第3年每6个月复查一次,第3年及以后每年复查一次。最终随访结束日期为2022年6月,观察并记录两组患者1年、2年、3年、4年、5年复发率、进展率及膀胱刺激、血尿情况。

2.5. 统计学方法

采用SPSS 26.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析,计量资料采用t检验,计数资料采用c2检验,无复发生存时间采用Kaplan-Meier分析,比较采用Log Rank检验。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

3.1. 复发情况

观察组术后1年、2年、3年、4年复发率为5.56%、13.89%、22.22%、31.94%,对照组为22.86%、35.71%、47.14%、54.29%,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05,表2);而观察组和对照组5年的复发率分别为50.00%,58.57%,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05,表1),Kaplan-Meier生存曲线详见图1

Table 1. Comparison of postoperative recurrence between two groups (n, %)

表1. 2组患者术后复发比较(n, %)

Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier survival curve without recurrence in two groups

图1. 2组患者无复发Kaplan-Meier生存曲线

3.2. 进展情况

观察组术后1年、2年、3年、4年、5年进展率为4.17%、8.33%、10.25%、13.89%、19.44%,对照组为7.14%、10.00%、14.29%、17.14%、18.57%,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05,表2),Kaplan-Meier生存曲线详见图2

Table 2. Comparison of postoperative progress between two groups (n, %)

表2. 2组患者术后进展比较(n, %)

Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier survival curve without progression in two groups

图2. 2组患者无进展Kaplan-Meier生存曲线

3.3. 不良反应情况

观察组的膀胱刺激症发生率、血尿发生率为22.86%、8.57%,对照组为47.14%、28.57%,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05,表3)。

Table 3. Comparison of postoperative adverse reactions between two groups (n, %)

表3. 2组患者术后不良反应比较(n, %)

4. 讨论

TURBT是NMIBC的主要治疗方式,可有效改善临床症状,但复发率较高,术后1年内大约有10%~67%的患者会复发,术后5年内大约有24%~84%的患者会复发,术中肿瘤切除不彻底、肿瘤种植或术后新发肿瘤是常见的复发原因 [7]。为了降低患者膀胱肿瘤复发率,术后多采用膀胱灌注化疗药物以此来延长患者无复发生存时间 [8]。术后24小时内的膀胱灌注可明显降低NMIBC患者的复发风险 [9],其主要作用机理是杀灭术中未彻底切除的肿瘤细胞,并可有效预防术中肿瘤细胞脱落种植,从而可延迟或避免术后复发 [10]。临床上用于膀胱灌注化疗的药物种类繁多疗效不一,常用的灌注化疗药物包括吡柔比星、表柔比星、吉西他滨、丝裂霉素等 [11]。丝裂霉素曾经是NMIBC治疗的首选药物,由于其灌注后多会导致膀胱刺激等症状,副作用较大,已被具有相似疗效且成本更低的吉西他滨取代。吉西他滨最早用于治疗肺癌和胰腺癌,其抗肿瘤谱广且耐受性良好 [12]。作为一种嘧啶抗代谢物,能特异性抑制细胞周期,主要作用于DNA细胞合成期,阻断细胞G1期向S期增殖 [13]。在进入细胞后,它被脱氧胞苷激酶激活,并在细胞内转化为二磷酸吉西他滨和三磷酸吉西他滨。二磷酸吉西他滨可以通过协同作用促进三磷酸吉西他滨与DNA的竞争性结合,从而阻止DNA的进一步合成,发挥其抗肿瘤作用 [14],要达到最大疗效需要40分钟以上的给药时间 [8]。除此之外,吉西他滨还用于新辅助和姑息治疗的尿路上皮癌的多化疗药物联合治疗,其中最常见的组合是吉西他滨和顺铂联合使用 [15]。吡柔比星是一种蒽环类化合物,作为一种浓度依赖性的抗癌药物,广泛用于膀胱内灌注化疗。通过抑制拓扑异构酶II以及结合DNA碱基对来阻止蛋白质合成,具备较好的抗肿瘤的作用同时毒性反应小,随着暴露时间的延长,肿瘤组织中吡柔比星的浓度逐渐升高,而随着肿瘤大小的增加,其浓度逐渐降低,肿瘤组织中对吡柔比星的摄取随着肿瘤体积的增加而减少 [16]。Kageyama等人的实验 [17] 表明,单纯行TURBT和TURBT术后行吡柔比星灌注化疗两者的1年和5年无复发生存率分别为79%、54%和91%、72%,水溶性差是它在临床应用中所面对的主要问题 [18]。有研究表明 [19],吡柔比星联合透明质酸相较于单独应用吡柔比星术后复发率方面更加令人满意。本研究通过对两种化疗药物疗效及部分不良反应进行比较,结果表明在预防复发以及灌注后不良反应方面,吉西他滨表现更好,而且价格低廉。但在应用吉西他滨与吡柔比星灌注化疗第5年间两者复发率无统计学差异。

综上所述,吉西他滨在降低NMIBC复发率方面有较好的表现,灌注后的不良反应也明显低于吡柔比星。在没有发现更有效更合理的药物前,吉西他滨仍将作为NMIBC的化疗药物发挥作用,是NMIBC术后的灌注化疗优势选择。然而,化疗药物都具有一定的毒性,只有选择效果显著且不良反应少的化疗药物,才能降低复发率,延迟复发时间,提高生存率,延长生存时间,在预防膀胱癌术后复发、侵袭和转移方面发挥积极作用。但由于本研究为单中心研究且病例样本相对较少,研究结论尚需多中心、大样本来验证。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Siegel, R.L., et al. (2022) Cancer Statistics, 2022. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 72, 7-33.
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708
[2] Nielsen, M.E., et al. (2014) Trends in Stage-Specific Incidence Rates for Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder in the United States: 1988 to 2006. Cancer, 120, 86-95.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28397
[3] Park, J.C., et al. (2014) Multimodal Management of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. Current Problems in Cancer, 38, 80-108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2014.06.001
[4] Lamm, D.L. (2003) Intravesical Therapy for Superficial Bladder Cancer: Slow but Steady Progress. The Journal of Urology, 142, 719-722.
https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.08.099
[5] Oddens, J.R., van der Meijden, A.P.M. and Sylvester, R. (2004) One Immediate Postoperative Instillation of Chemotherapy in Low Risk Ta, T1 Bladder Cancer Patients. Is It Always Safe? European Urology, 46, 336-338.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2004.05.003
[6] Pal, D.K., et al. (2020) Association of Arsenic with Recurrence of Urinary Bladder Cancer. Tropical Doctor, 50, 325-330.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049475520930155
[7] Sylvester, R.J., et al. (2006) Predicting Recurrence and Progres-sion in Individual Patients with Stage Ta T1 Bladder Cancer Using EORTC Risk Tables: A Combined Analysis of 2596 Patients from Seven EORTC Trials. European Urology, 49, 466-477.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.031
[8] Krabbe, L.-M. and Schmidt, S. (2015) Intravesical Gemcitabine for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer. Der Urologe, 54, 402-405.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-015-3779-2
[9] Bosschieter, J., et al. (2018) Value of an Immediate Intravesical Instillation of Mitomycin C in Patients with Non- Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Prospective Multicentre Random-ised Study in 2243 Patients. European Urology, 73, 226-232.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.038
[10] Liu, B.C., et al. (2013) Chitosan-Modified d-α-Tocopheryl Poly (Ethylene Glycol) 1000 Succinate-b-Poly(ε-Caprolactone- Ran-Glycolide) Nanoparticles for the Oral Chemotherapy of Bladder Cancer. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 130, 2118-2126.
https://doi.org/10.1002/app.39330
[11] Joice, G.A., Bivalacqua, T.J. and Kates, M. (2019) Optimizing Pharmacokinetics of Intravesical Chemotherapy for Bladder Cancer. Nature Reviews Urology, 16, 599-612.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-019-0220-4
[12] Messing, E.M., et al. (2018) Effect of Intravesical Instillation of Gemcitabine vs Saline Immediately Following Resection of Suspected Low-Grade Non-Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer on Tumor Recurrence: SWOG S0337 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 319, 1880-1888.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.4657
[13] Palleschi, G., et al. (2015) Videourodynamic Evaluation of Intracorporeally Reconstructed Orthotopic U-Shaped Ileal Neobladders. Urology, 85, 883-889.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.09.067
[14] Li, R., et al. (2020) Intravesical Gemcitabine versus Mitomycin for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trial. BMC Urology, 20, Article No. 97.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00610-9
[15] Schlack, K., et al. (2016) The Safety and Efficacy of Gemcitabine for the Treatment of Bladder Cancer. Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy, 16, 255-271.
https://doi.org/10.1586/14737140.2016.1143777
[16] Arakawa, M., et al. (2011) Intravesical Administration of Pirarubicin against Superficial Bladder Cancer: Relationship between Tumor Tissue Concentration and Exposure Time in the Bladder or Therapeutic Effect. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 2, 901-905.
https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2011.315
[17] Kageyama, S., et al. (2021) Single Short Retention Instillation of Piraru-bicin Prevents Intravesical Recurrence of Low-Risk Non Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer. In Vivo, 35, 1141-1145.
https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12360
[18] Eskandari, Z., et al. (2021) Targeting Breast Cancer Using Pirarubi-cin-Loaded Vasoactive Intestinal Peptide Grafted Sterically Stabilized Micelles. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 162, Article ID: 105830.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2021.105830
[19] Huang, W., et al. (2015) Efficacy and Safety of Pirarubicin Com-bined with Hyaluronic Acid for Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer after Transurethral Resection: A Prospective, Randomized Study. International Urology and Nephrology, 47, 631-636.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-015-0940-1