目的 评价FOLFOX方案与XELOX方案治疗中晚期结肠癌的疗效和安全性。方法 通过计算机检索维普数据库、中国生物医学文摘数据库、中国知网、万方数据与PubMed等数据库,采用RevMan 5.3软件对符合纳入标准的临床研究进行质量评价与meta分析。结果 本研究共纳入12篇文献,共1 614例结肠癌患者,FOLFOX组801例,XELOX组813例。Meta分析显示两种方案在总体应答率、完全应答率、部分应答率、总体生存率、无病进展存活率上差异均无统计学意义;Ⅲ/Ⅳ级不良反应中XELOX方案导致的手足综合征发生率高于FOLFOX方案(RR＝0.2,95%CI 0.08～0.51, P<0.001),而FOLFOX方案导致的Ⅲ/Ⅳ级中性粒细胞减少症高于XELOX方案(RR＝5.47,95%CI 3.42～8.76,P<0.001)。结论 FOLFOX方案与XELOX方案在治疗中晚期结肠癌方面的疗效相似,但需要注意XELOX方案具有较易发生Ⅲ/Ⅳ级手足综合征的风险,而FOLFOX方案则具有相对易发生Ⅲ/Ⅳ级中性粒细胞减少症的风险。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX regimen and XELOX regimen in the treatment of advanced colon cancer.Methods The following five databases were searched: VIP Database, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, and PubMed.The quality assessment and meta analysis of the clinical studies meeting the inclusion criteria were performed using RevMan 5.3 software.Results A total of 12 articles were included in the study, with 1 614 colon cancer patients, 801 to the FOLFOX group and 813 to the XELOX group.There was no significant difference in overall response, complete response, partial response, overall survival, and progression-free survival between the two regimens.The incidence rate of grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ hand-foot syndrome caused by XELOX regimen (RR=0.2, 95% CI 0.08-0.51, P<0.001) was higher than that by FOLFOX regimen, while the grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ neutropenia caused by FOLFOX regimen (RR=5.47, 95%CI 3.42-8.76, P<0.001) was higher than that by XELOX regimen.Conclusion The efficacy of FOLFOX regimen on advanced colon cancer is similar to that of XELOX regimen, but it is worth noting that the risk of grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ hand-foot syndrome caused by XELOX regimen is higher, while the risk of grade Ⅲ/Ⅳ neutropenia caused by FOLFOX regimen is higher.
[1]Chen W, Sun K, Zheng R, et al.Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2014[J].Chin J Cancer Res, 2018,30(1):1-12.
[2] Gunjur A.Short vs long course adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer[J].Lancet Oncol, 2018,19(5):e236.
[3] 谢保红.不同辅助化疗方案治疗结肠癌的疗效对比分析[J].浙江临床医学, 2016,18(3):522- 523.
[4] Zhu YL, Lou J, Guo JY, et a1.A meta analysis of cetuximab plus oxaliplatin based chemotherapy regimen for metastatic colorectal cancer[J].Indian J Cancer, 2014,3(7):el13-el16.
[5] Zheng QH, Wu XL, Che XL, et a1.Chemotherapy combined with target drugs in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis based on Chinese patients[J].Indian J Cancer, 2014,3(7):110-112.
[6] 毛英,刘黎,张匠,等.辅助化疗XELOX方案与FOLFOX方案在Ⅱ～Ⅲ期结肠癌中的应用比较[J].实用医院临床杂志, 2018,15(6),48-52.
[7] Comella P, Massidda B, Filippelli G, et al.Randomised trial comparing biweekly oxaliplatin plus oral capecitabine versus oxaliplatin plus i.v.bolus fluorouracil/leucovorin in metastatic colorectal cancer patients: results of the Southern Italy Cooperative Oncology Study 0401[J].J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2009,135(2):217-226.
[8] Ducreux M, Bennouna J, Hebbar M,et al.Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer[J].Int J Cancer, 2011,128(3):682-690.
[9] 黄芳,刘超英.FOLFOX4 方案与XELOX 方案治疗转移性结直肠癌的疗效与不良反应分析[J].实用癌症杂志, 2016,31(10):1675-1677.
[10] 杨杰,黄玉辉,张伟群,等.FOLFOX 方案与XELOX方案用于结肠癌辅助化疗的成本-效果研究[J].当代医学, 2015,21(36):48-49.
[11] 胡萍,封革,高金锋.FOLFOX与XELOX方案用于Ⅱ/Ⅲ期结肠癌辅助化疗的疗效及不良反应[J].中国临床研究, 2016,29(11):1544-1546.
[12] 李蓉蓉,殷先利,刘振洋,等.XELOX 方案和mFOLFOX6方案治疗结直肠癌的临床疗效与安全性分析[J].现代中西医结合杂志, 2016,25(36):4069-4070.
[13] 杨兰,邓颖,胡洪林,等.XELOX方案与FOLFOX4方案治疗晚期结直肠癌疗效比较[J].武警医学, 2014,25(3):221-223.
[14] 陈倩雅,卢秀仪.XELOX方案与FOLFOX方案治疗大肠癌患者的疗效对比[J].中国现代药物应用, 2017,11(7):99-101.
[15] 马妮娜,王婧,李卉惠,等.XELOX 与FOLFOX6方案一线治疗晚期结直肠癌的近期疗效及不良反应比较[J].临床和实验医学杂志, 2014,13(13):1052-1055.
[16] 苏雪清.XELOX与FOLFOX6治疗结直肠癌的临床疗效比较[J].实用癌症杂志, 2013,28(4):370-372.
[17] 潘海燕,关晓东,张百萌.转移性结直肠癌XELOX 与FLOFOX6治疗方案的临床疗效与毒副反应观察[J].胃肠病学和肝病学杂志, 2016,25(2):144-147.
[18] 孙雅萌.XELOX与FOLFOX方案辅助治疗Ⅱ/Ⅲ期结肠癌的疗效对比[D].济南:山东大学,2014.
