TAC与CAF方案应用于乳腺癌新辅助化疗的疗效和安全性研究

摘要

目的 比较TAC与CAF方案应用于乳腺癌新辅助化疗的疗效和安全性.方法 74例均经病理学检查证实为乳腺癌患者,随机分为CAF组(37例)和TAC组(37例).21 d为1个周期,化疗2个周期后手术,比较其疗效和安全性.结果 两组患者均无不能耐受的不良反应而退出治疗.两组均无疾病进展者.TAC组完全缓解(CR)4例,部分缓解(PR)27例,病情稳定(SD)6例;CAF组CR 2例,PR 21例,SD 14例.两组疗效比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).TAC组与CAF组白细胞减少率、粒细胞减少率、脱发发生率比较,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.01);而血小板减少率、恶心呕吐发生率、心脏毒性发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 TAC与CAF方案均有效,在乳腺癌新辅助化疗中TAC方案的疗效优于CAF方案,毒副作用高于CAF方案.%Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of TAC regimen vs CAF regimen as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Methods Totally 74 patients with pathologically confirmed breast cancer were randomly divided into CAF group ( n = 37 ) and TAC group ( n = 37 ) . Patients in each group received surgery after two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy ( each cycle lasted 21 days ) , and the efficacy and safety were compared. Results No patient withdrew from the study due to the side effect. No disease progression was noted. The numbers of patients who got complete response ( CR ) , partial response ( PR ),stable disease ( SD ) were 4. 27 , and 6 in TAC group and 2, 21, and 14 in CAF group ( P ＜ 0. 05 ) . The incidences of leucopenia, granulocytopenia, and hair loss showed significant differences between these two group ( P ＜ 0. 01 ), while those of thrombocytopenia, nausea/vomiting, and cardiac toxicity were not significantly different ( P ＞ 0. 05 ) . Conclusion Both TAC and CAF are effective for the treatment of breast cancer. As a neoadjuvant chemotherapy, compared with CAF, TAC has better effectiveness and lower toxic effects.