不明原发灶颈部转移癌治疗失败原因和对策(英文)

目的分析不明原发灶颈部转移癌(unknown primary cervical metastatic carcinoma,UPCMC)的治疗方法和治疗失败原因,探讨其治疗策略。方法回顾性研究1978年1月～1997年12月收治的符合诊断标准的 UPCMC 111例的临床资料、治疗和转归,比较和分析不同治疗组的颈部控制率、原发灶治疗失败率及远期生存率。结果全组原发灶出现率10.8%(12/111),颈部控制率为36.9%,总的5年生存率为41.4%;影响预后的因素为颈部控制情况、N分期、原发灶控制情况,颈部控制率的影响因素为 N 分期和是否全颈放疗。结论 UPCMC 的颈部治疗应以放疗为主,部分放射不敏感病理类型的 N1、N2病例可采取放疗和手术的综合治疗;颈部放疗以全颈放疗为佳;对潜在原发灶的治疗推荐采取选择性放疗的策略。     

不明原发灶颈部转移癌治疗失败原因和对策

目的:分析不明原发灶颈部转移癌(unknown primary cervical metastatic carcinoma,UPCMC)的治疗方法和失败原因,探讨其治疗策略.方法:探讨111例UPCMC的临床资料、治疗和转归,比较和分析不同治疗组的颈部控制率、原发灶治疗失败率及远期生存率.结果:全组原发灶出现率为10.8%(12/111),颈部控制率为36.9%,5年生存率为41.4%;影响预后的因素为颈部控制情况、N分期、原发灶控制情况;颈部控制率的影响因素为N分期与是否全颈放疗.结论:UPCMC应以放疗为主,部分放疗不敏感的N1、N2病例可采取放疗加手术的综合治疗;颈部以全颈放疗为佳;对潜在原发灶的治疗推荐采取选择性放疗.     

原发灶不明的颈部淋巴结转移癌的治疗

目的：分析原发灶不明和颈部淋巴结转移癌治疗失败的原因，探讨治疗方法和技术。方法：共收集122例初治治疗的病例，单纯放射治疗（R）62例，单纯手术治疗（S）23例，单纯化疗（C）5例，手术加放射治疗（S＋R）20例，放射治疗加手术（R＋S）12例。手术治疗局部淋巴结切除术 18例，单侧颈淋巴结清扫术34例，双侧颈巴结清扫术3例。放射治疗94例中，全咽部和全颈部照射65例，全颈部照射9例，部分颈部照射20例。结果：全组5年总生存率和无瘤生存率分别为71．9％和36．5％，颈部转移癌未控和复发占45．9％，远地转移率为26．2％，原发灶发现占8．2％。影响颈部治疗失败的主要原因是N分期、综合治疗、全颈照射和肿瘤的放射敏感性。影响远地转移的主要原因是N分期、颈部淋巴结转移部位和原发灶出现。影响原发灶治疗失败的主要原因是颈淋巴结转移部位。结论：早期鳞癌或低分化部、未分化癌局部手术切除或活检术后直接进行放射治疗，晚期颈转移以放射治疗和手术综合治疗为主，可同时加化疗，而腺癌治疗以手术为主。对上中颈部低分化和未分化癌应采用全咽部和全颈部照射，除锁骨上淋巴结转移癌以外，原发灶不明的颈部淋巴结转移癌照射野至少应该包括全颈部。     

不明原发灶颈部转移癌的诊断

虽然理论上所有的颈部转移癌都有原发灶的存在,但临床上并非所有的颈部转移癌都可以找到原发灶,原发灶的检出与否直接影响患者的生存率和生活质量。近年来,随着诊断仪器的开发、诊断技术的提高和诊断方法的改进,越来越多的不明原发灶颈部转移癌(unknown primary cervical metastatic carcinoma,UPCMC)被检测出原发灶。本文重点对UPCMC的定义、传统和新近发展的诊断方法进行综述。     

原发灶不明的颈部转移癌的治疗

大约20％左右的颈部恶性肿块始终找不到原发病灶,这类病例的治疗较困难,患者甚至放弃治疗。本科1977年至1991年收治原发灶不明的颈部转移癌18例,现就治疗等问题作回顾性总结分析。临床资料病例选择:本组病例皆以颈部包块为主诉收治,不伴其它症状。对头颈和胸腹等处的可疑部位,在治疗前、中、后作过影像学、细胞学或病理学检查,均无阳性发现。死亡原因为病灶局部复发。性别和年龄:男14例,女4例。年龄32岁～70岁,45岁以上者14例,占77.8%。病理类型:低分化鳞癌11例(占61％),腺癌2例,未分化癌5例。部位和大小:右颈7例,左颈11例,以中上颈部为多。10例包块直径≥5cm,2例为颈部多个蚕豆大小的包块,其余6例颈块直径<5cm     

原发灶不明的颈部转移癌49例临床分析

目的:探讨原发灶不明的颈部转移癌的诊断及治疗方法。方法:我院自1980年～1990年共收治原发灶不明的颈部转移癌49例,最终发现原发灶21例(42.9％),以鼻咽、肺最常见。对单纯放疗、放疗加化疗、手术加放疗和/或化疗综合治疗三种方法进行比较。结果:3、5年总生存率分别为55.1％和18.4％。手术加放疗和/或化疗综合治疗优于其他两种方法。结论:随着颈部转移癌部位的下移,其治疗效果越差。     

原发灶不明的颈部转移癌临床分析

临床上原发病灶不明的颈部淋巴结转移癌比较常见,国外有报道约占颈部转移癌的４％～９％［１］。各地对原发灶不明的颈部转移癌的诊断标准没有统一,一般符合以下标准：（１）以往无恶性肿瘤作者单位：浙江省衢州市人民医院３２４０００衢州市钟楼底１号病史,包括性质不...     

原发灶不明的颈部转移癌之诊治思路

原发灶不明的颈部转移癌（cervical metastatic carcinoma of unknown primary site,CCUP）的检出与否直接影响患者的生存率和生活质量。全文对CUPP的产生原因、诊断思路及治疗方案作一综述,以期对临床工作有所帮助。     

Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of an Unknown Primary Tumor Localized to the Neck

68 patients with metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) of an unknown primary tumor localized to the neck were treated between 1981 and 1990. There were 11 patients treated with radiotherapy alone, 24 patients treated with surgery and radiotherapy and 33 patients treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Male to female ratio was 1.9 : 1 and the median age was 55 years (range, 33 to 71 years). 41 (61%) patients had N3 disease, 18 (26%) patients had N2 disease and 9 (13%) patients had N1 disease. The majority of N3 patients were treated with radiotherapy + chemotherapy (n=17) and surgery + radiotherapy (n=17). The complete response (CR) to radiotherapy + chemotherapy was 73% with 19 patients having no evidence of disease currently. The median survival time (MST of this group was 34+ months. Of the 35 patients who had surgery and/or radiotherapy, 7 (20%) currently have no evident disease. The MST of these two groups (combined) was 22 months. Patients with N3 disease who received radiotherapy + chemotherapy had a higher CR rate and longer MST when compared with those without chemotherapy.     

Site-specific Chemotherapy Based on Predicted Primary Site by Pathological Profile for Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Site

Aims

Although platinum-based combination chemotherapies are commonly used for unfavourable subsets of cancer of unknown primary (CUP), the prognosis remains poor. Several studies have suggested that gene expression profiling or immunohistochemistry was useful for the prediction of primary sites in CUP, and site-specific therapy based on predicted primary sites might improve overall outcomes. In Japan, to identify primary sites, immunohistochemical tests were commonly used for CUP in clinical practice. However, it is unclear whether site-specific therapy based on predicted primary sites by pathological examination contributes survival benefit for unfavourable CUP subsets.

Brain Metastases in Patients with Cancer of Unknown Primary

Between January 1985 and December 2000, 916 patients with brain metastases were treated with whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) at the Department of Radiotherapy, University Hospital Freiburg. In 47 patients, a primary tumor could not be identified (cancer of unknown primary (CUP)). Sixteen patients had a solitary brain metastasis, 31 patients presented with multiple brain metastases. Surgical resection was performed in 15 patients, biopsy alone in 12 patients. WBRT was applied with daily fractions of 2 or 3Gy to a total dose of 50 or 30Gy, respectively. According to the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) classes of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group for patients with brain metastases none of the patients met the criteria for Class I, 23 for Class II, and 24 for Class III.The median overall survival (OS) for all patients with brain metastases (n = 916) was 3.4 and 4.8 months for patients with CUP (p = 0.45). In patients with CUP (n = 47) the median OS for patients with a single brain metastasis was 7.3 versus 3.9 months for patients with multiple brain metastases (p = 0.05). Median OS for patients with a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) 70 was 6.3 months versus 3.2 months for KPS <70 (p = 0.01).At multivariate analysis performance status and resection status could be identified as independent prognostic factors for the OS.     

92例原发灶不明的颈部转移性癌治疗失败模式分析

目的 回顾分析原发灶不明的颈部转移性癌患者疗效及治疗失败模式,比较选择性咽腔黏膜预防照射与单侧颈部处理两种治疗模式在疗效上的不同。方法 收集2007-2013年收治的原发灶不明的颈部转移性癌患者资料。按治疗方式不同分为咽腔黏膜预防照射组31例,单侧颈部处理组61例。生存率采用Kaplan-Meier法计算,并Logrank法检验。结果 92例患者中位年龄为57岁;79.3%患者有Ⅱ区淋巴结转移。经过中位36.5个月随访,3年的总生存率、黏膜控制率、颈部控制率分别为89%、87%、82%。15例患者出现原发灶,其中鼻咽部4例、口咽部3例、口腔3例、喉和下咽3例、上颌窦1例、食管1例。接受咽腔黏膜预防照射患者具有较高黏膜控制率(100%∶75%,P=0.040)及颈部控制率(88%∶62%,P=0.037),但两组总生存率相近(84%∶89%,P=0.910)。结论 对于原发灶不明的颈部转移性癌患者,选择性咽腔黏膜的预防性照射可能会减少原发灶出现率及增加颈部控制率,但还需大样本证实。     

Whole Body 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging in the Detection of Primary Tumours in Patients with a Metastatic Carcinoma of Unknown Origin

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of whole body 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging in thedetection of primary tumors in patients with a metastatic cancer from an unknown primary site. Methods: Thestudy population consisted of 43 patients with a biopsy proven metastatic disease, negative conventional diagnosticprocedures (including CT/MRI/endoscopic procedures) and a whole body 18F-FDG PET/CT examination.Patients’ records were retrospectively analyzed. According to the final pathologic diagnoses, rate of detection ofthe primary tumor site was determined. Additionally, overall patient survival was calculated to evaluate theprognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT findings. Results: A primary tumor site was shown by 18F-FDG PET/CTin 24 patients (24/43; 55.8%). In 18 patients 18F-FDG PET/CT scans were negative (18/43; 41.8%). In a patientwith an adenocarcinoma metastasis 18F-FDG PET/CT was falsely positive for an inflammatory lesion in thelung. Among the 18F-FDG PET/CT positive and negative groups median overall survival was not significantlydifferent (log-rank p=0.573). Conclusion: Whole body 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging has a high rate of detectionof a primary tumor in patients with a carcinoma of unknown origin.     

子宫颈癌放疗中的几个临床问题

该文阐述了子宫颈癌放疗时应注意的问题，如参照点的选择，消除量，宫腔剂量，阴道后装容器的使用，子宫移位对照射剂量的影响，主动脉旁淋巴区的照射，及与手术，化疗配合的问题，其目的是提高放疗疗效，降低并发症的发生率。