切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

第五届中国出版政府奖音像电子网络出版物奖提名奖

中国科技核心期刊

中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)来源期刊

中华重症医学电子杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 05 ›› Issue (02) : 165 -172. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-1537.2019.02.015

所属专题: 文献

重症医学研究

重症医学支持下指导肿瘤患者化疗的评分系统及检验指标的分析
卢微微1, 周坤1, 陈崇翔2, 赵擎宇2,()   
  1. 1. 510060 广州,中山大学肿瘤防治中心医院重症医学科;510080 广州,中山大学中山医学院临床医学系
    2. 510060 广州,中山大学肿瘤防治中心医院重症医学科
  • 收稿日期:2018-08-29 出版日期:2019-05-28
  • 通信作者: 赵擎宇
  • 基金资助:
    国家卫生和计划生育委员会专项基金(1311200006402)

Analysis of scoring systems and test rating about chemotherapy for cancer patients supported by critical care medicine

Weiwei Lu1, Kun Zhou1, Chongxiang Chen2, Qingyu Zhao2,()   

  1. 1. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, China; Department of Clinical Medicine, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, china
    2. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, China
  • Received:2018-08-29 Published:2019-05-28
  • Corresponding author: Qingyu Zhao
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zhao Qingyu, Email:
引用本文:

卢微微, 周坤, 陈崇翔, 赵擎宇. 重症医学支持下指导肿瘤患者化疗的评分系统及检验指标的分析[J/OL]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2019, 05(02): 165-172.

Weiwei Lu, Kun Zhou, Chongxiang Chen, Qingyu Zhao. Analysis of scoring systems and test rating about chemotherapy for cancer patients supported by critical care medicine[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care & Intensive Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2019, 05(02): 165-172.

目的

对重症医学支持下指导肿瘤患者化疗的评分系统及检验指标进行分析,为临床选择适合的重症肿瘤患者进行化疗提供依据。

方法

回顾性分析2010年1月至2016年12月在中山大学肿瘤防治中心住院期间因病情加重转入重症医学科(ICU)在重症医学技术支持下进行抗肿瘤化疗以改善肿瘤导致危重病情的44例肿瘤患者的临床资料。依据患者化疗后28 d的预后情况化分为死亡组(24例)、存活组(20例)。搜集患者入ICU后初始的各项肿瘤学评分系统[卡氏评分(KPS)、美国东部肿瘤协作组(ECOG)评分]及重症医学评分系统[急性生理与慢性健康评估(APACHEⅡ)、序贯器官功能衰竭评估(SOFA)、Logistic器官功能障碍评分(LODS)、多器官功能不全评分(MODS)、国家预警分数(NEWS)、系统炎症反应综合征(SIRS)、快速序贯器官功能衰竭评估(qSOFA)]的相关指标,并计算分值;以及患者化疗前的实验室检验结果、化疗期间的症状及支持手段,采用SPSS 22.0统计软件进行数据分析。

结果

2组患者的肿瘤学评分系统及重症医学评分系统均未见明显统计学差异。化疗后死亡组的需要血管活性药物升压比例、丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)、碱性磷酸酶(ALP)以及γ-谷氨酰转肽酶(GGT)均较存活组高,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。而其余指标未见明显统计学差异。将单因素分析后具有统计学意义的检验指标(需要血管活性药物升压比例、ALT、ALP、GGT)纳入多因素Logistic回归分析,发现需要血管活性药物升压比例(OR=12.306,95%CI:1.200~126.175)、ALP水平(OR=1.020,95%CI:1.003~1.039)为预测重症肿瘤患者化疗预后的独立危险因素。受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析显示,ALP的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.753,95%CI为0.605~0.901,P<0.05,截点值为86.25,敏感度为83.3%,特异度为70.0%。

结论

进行化疗的重症肿瘤患者中,使用一般的肿瘤学评分系统或者一些重症医学评分系统均未能有效预测重症患者是否适合、可耐受化疗。血液肿瘤患者较实体肿瘤患者的预后存在优势。患者的肝功能相关指标可区分耐受化疗的重症肿瘤患者,而化疗期间是否使用血管活性药物升压、ALP则是判断重症肿瘤患者化疗预后的独立危险因素。

Objective

to analyze the scoring systems and test rating about chemotherapy for cancer patients supported by critical care medicine, hope to provide some clinical basis for the choice of chemotherapy for severe tumors.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 44 patients admitted to ICU and then given chemotherapy in ICU at the Sun Yat-sen University from January 2010 to December 2016. All patients were diagnosed as malignant tumors. According to the change of the patient′s condition after chemotherapy, they were divided into the worsening group (24) and the improvement group (20). The initial oncology scoring systems [Karnofsky (KPS), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)] and intensive medical scoring systems [Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 2 (APACHEⅡ), sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), Logistic organ dysfunoction system (LODS), quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA), multiple organ dysfunction score (MODS), systematic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and National early warning score (NEWS)] were calculated with the relevant indexs; results of different scoring systems, the test results before chemotherapy, the symptoms during chemotherapy and supportive methods during chemotherapy were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 statistical software.

Results

There was no significant difference between various scoring systems. The proportion of using vasoactive drugs to increase blood pressure, ALT, ALP and GGT in provement group were higher than these in worsening group. The differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The proportion of using vasoactive drugs to increase blood pressure, ALT, ALP, GGT were included in multivariate analysis. It was found that ″using vasoactive drugs to increase blood pressure″ (OR=12.306, 95%CI: 1.200-126.175) and ALP (OR=1.020, 95%CI: 1.003-1.039) were independent risk factors for predicting the prognosis of critically ill cancer patients. The area under the curve (AUC) of ALP was 0.753, 95%CI: 0.605-0.901 with 86.25 of cut-off value, 83.3% of sensitivity, and 70.0% of specificity.

Conclusions

In ICU, general scoring system or severe medical scoring system are unable to predict whether severe patients are resistant to chemotherapy or would benef from chemotherapy. The prognosis of patients with hematologic malignancies is better than that of solid tumors. The liver function index of patients can be useful to predict the resistance to chemotherapy patients, ″using vasoactive drugs to increase blood pressure″ and ALP are the independent risk factors for prognosis after chemotherapy.

表1 2组重症化疗的肿瘤患者基线情况比较[例(%)]
表2 2组重症化疗的肿瘤患者肿瘤学评分及重症医学方面评分比较
表3 2组重症化疗的肿瘤患者化疗期间相应症状及支持手段比较[例(%)]
表4 2组重症化疗的肿瘤患者基线实验室指标比较(±s
表5 多因素Logistic回归分析预后的独立危险因素
图1 碱性磷酸酶的受试者工作特征曲线
表6 独立危险因素的ROC曲线
1
Schnipper LE, Smith TJ, Raghavan D, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology identifies five key opportunities to improve care and reduce costs: the top five list for oncology [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2012, 30(14):1715-1724.
2
Näppä U, Lindqvist O, Rasmussen BH, et al. Palliative chemotherapy during the last month of life [J]. Ann Oncol, 2011, 22(11):2375-2380.
3
O’Brien ME, Borthwick A, Rigg A, et al. Mortality within 30 days of chemotherapy: a clinical governance benchmarking issue for oncology patients [J]. Br J Cancer, 2006, 95(12):1632-1636.
4
Darmon M, Thiery G, Ciroldi M, et al. Intensive care in patients with newly diagnosed malignancies and a need for cancer chemotherapy [J]. Crit Care Med, 2005, 33(11):2488-2493.
5
Benoit DD, Depuydt PO, Vandewoude KH, et al. Outcome in severely ill patients with hematological malignancies who received intravenous chemotherapy in the intensive care unit [J]. Intensive Care Med, 2006, 32(1):93-99.
6
Song JU, Suh GY, Chung MP, et al. Risk factors to predict outcome in critically ill cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the intensive care unit [J]. Support Care Cancer, 2011, 19(4):491-495.
7
周际昌. 实用肿瘤内科治疗[M]. 北京:北京科学技术出版社,2010.
8
Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) [J]. JAMA, 2016, 315(8):801-810.
9
Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aisner DL, et al. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 5.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2017, 15(4):504-535.
10
Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R, et al. Breast Cancer, Version 4.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2018, 16(3):310-320.
11
Motzer RJ, Jonasch E, Agarwal N, et al. Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2017, 15(6):804-834.
12
Mohler JL, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, et al. Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2016 [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2016, 14(1):19-30.
13
Spiess PE, Agarwal N, Bangs R, et al. Bladder Cancer, Version 5.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2017, 15(10):1240-1267.
14
Ajani JA, D’Amico TA, Almhanna K, et al. National comprehensive cancer network. Esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers, version 1.2015 [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2015, 13(2):194-227.
15
Ajani JA, D’Amico TA, Almhanna K, et al. Gastric Cancer, Version 3.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2016, 14(10):1286-1312.
16
Tempero MA, Malafa MP, Al-Hawary M, et al. Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology [J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2017, 15(8):1028-1061.
17
Emanuel EJ, Young-Xu Y, Levinsky NG, et al. Chemotherapy use among Medicare beneficiaries at the end of life [J]. Ann Intern Med, 2003, 138(8):639-643.
18
Earle CC, Neville BA, Landrum MB, et al. Trends in the aggressiveness of cancer care near the end of life [J]. J Clin Oncol, 2004, 22(2):315-321.
19
Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al. Prognosis in acute organ-system failure [J]. Ann Surg, 1985, 202(6):685-693.
20
American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference: Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis [J]. Crit Care Med, 1992, 20(6):864-874.
21
Le Gall JR, Klar J, Lemeshow S, et al. The Logistic Organ Dysfunction system. A new way to assess organ dysfunction in the intensive care unit. ICU Scoring Group [J]. JAMA, 1996, 276(10):802-810.
22
钟南山, 刘又宁. 呼吸病学 [M]. 2版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2012.
23
Newsome PN, Cramb R, Davison SM, et al. Guidelines on the management of abnormal liver blood tests [J]. Gut, 2018, 67(1):6-19.
24
Yamamoto K, Awogi T, Okuyama K, et al. Nuclear localization of alkaline phosphatase in cultured human cancer cells [J]. Med Electron Microsc, 2003, 36(1):47-51.
25
Aragon G, Younossi AM. When and how to evaluate mildly elevated liver enzymes in apparently healthy patients [J]. Cleve Clin J Med, 2010, 77(3):195-204.
26
Leung TW, Tang AM, Zee B, et al. Construction of the Chinese University Prognostic Index for hepatocellular carcinoma and comparison with the TNM staging system, the Okuda staging system, and the Cancer of the Liver Italian Program staging system: a study based on 926 patients [J]. Cancer, 2002, 94(6):1760-1769.
27
何明媛,李凤虎. 血清碱性磷酸酶及乳酸脱氢酶与Ⅰ~Ⅲ期乳腺癌生存的相关性[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2017, 44(12):816-822.
28
Wei RJ, Li TY, Yang XC, et al. Serum levels of PSA, ALP, ICTP, and BSP in prostate cancer patients and the significance of ROC curve in the diagnosis of prostate cancer bone metastases [J]. Genet Mol Res, 2016, 15(2):1-9.
29
Kim JM, Kwon CH, Joh JW, et al. The effect of alkaline phosphatase and intrahepatic metastases in large hepatocellular carcinoma [J]. World J Surg Oncol, 2013, 11:40.
30
Du WX, Duan SF, Chen JJ, et al. Serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase as a biomarker for osseous metastases in patients with malignant carcinomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. J Cancer Res Ther, 2014, 10(Suppl):140-143.
31
Wang Z, Lu Y, Qiao D, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic validity of serum bone turnover markers in bone metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients [J]. J Bone Oncol, 2015, 4(3):85-91.
[1] 韩萌萌, 冯雪园, 马宁. 乳腺癌改良根治术后桡神经损伤1例[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 117-118.
[2] 李国新, 陈新华. 全腹腔镜下全胃切除术食管空肠吻合的临床研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 1-4.
[3] 陈方鹏, 杨大伟, 金从稳. 腹腔镜近端胃癌切除术联合改良食管胃吻合术重建His角对术后反流性食管炎的效果研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 15-18.
[4] 许杰, 李亚俊, 韩军伟. 两种入路下腹腔镜根治性全胃切除术治疗超重胃癌的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 19-22.
[5] 李刘庆, 陈小翔, 吕成余. 全腹腔镜与腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 23-26.
[6] 刘世君, 马杰, 师鲁静. 胃癌完整系膜切除术+标准D2根治术治疗进展期胃癌的近中期随访研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 27-30.
[7] 任佳, 马胜辉, 王馨, 石秀霞, 蔡淑云. 腹腔镜全胃切除、间置空肠代胃术的临床观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 31-34.
[8] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[9] 吴晖, 佴永军, 施雪松, 魏晓为. 两种解剖入路下行直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 40-43.
[10] 周世振, 朱兴亚, 袁庆港, 刘理想, 王凯, 缪骥, 丁超, 汪灏, 管文贤. 吲哚菁绿荧光成像技术在腹腔镜直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫中的应用效果分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 44-47.
[11] 常小伟, 蔡瑜, 赵志勇, 张伟. 高强度聚焦超声消融术联合肝动脉化疗栓塞术治疗原发性肝细胞癌的效果及安全性分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 56-59.
[12] 高杰红, 黎平平, 齐婧, 代引海. ETFA和CD34在乳腺癌中的表达及与临床病理参数和预后的关系研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 64-67.
[13] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[14] 王露, 周丽君. 全腹腔镜下远端胃大部切除不同吻合方式对胃癌患者胃功能恢复、并发症发生率的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 92-95.
[15] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
阅读次数
全文


摘要