| Literature DB >> 35754698 |
Abstract
Objective: To explore the efficacy of modified Qingre Jiedu decoction combined with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in treating moderate to advanced ovarian carcinoma (OC) and its effect on patients' serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125).Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35754698 PMCID: PMC9217599 DOI: 10.1155/2022/1821719
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Figure 1Study technical process.
Comparison of baseline data between the two groups (n = 42).
| Item | Single chemotherapy group | Combined group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (mean ± SD, years) | 47.42 ± 4.17 | 47.48 ± 4.03 | 0.067 | 0.947 |
| BMI (mean ± SD, kg/m2) | 21.26 ± 0.83 | 21.30 ± 0.76 | 0.230 | 0.818 |
| Pathological type | ||||
|
| 26 (61.90%) | 24 (57.14%) | 0.198 | 0.657 |
|
| 12 (28.57%) | 10 (23.81%) | 0.398 | 0.528 |
|
| 4 (9.52%) | 8 (19.05%) | 1.556 | 0.212 |
| Tumor stage | 0.233 | 0.629 | ||
|
| 29 (69.05%) | 31 (73.81%) | ||
|
| 13 (30.95%) | 11 (26.19%) | ||
| Degree of differentiation | ||||
|
| 6 (14.29%) | 7 (16.67%) | 0.091 | 0.763 |
|
| 26 (61.90%) | 27 (64.29%) | 0.051 | 0.821 |
|
| 10 (23.81%) | 8 (19.05%) | 0.283 | 0.595 |
| Marital status | ||||
|
| 33 (78.57%) | 35 (83.33%) | 0.309 | 0.578 |
|
| 5 (11.90%) | 2 (4.76%) | 1.403 | 0.236 |
|
| 4 (9.52%) | 5 (11.90%) | 0.124 | 0.724 |
| Educational degree | ||||
|
| 9 (21.43%) | 11 (26.19%) | 0.263 | 0.608 |
|
| 25 (59.52%) | 21 (50.00%) | 0.769 | 0.381 |
|
| 8 (19.05%) | 10 (23.81%) | 0.283 | 0.595 |
| Place of residence | 0.429 | 0.513 | ||
|
| 19 (45.24%) | 22 (52.38%) | ||
|
| 23 (54.76%) | 20 (47.62%) | ||
Comparison of clinical efficacy between the two groups (n(%)).
| Group |
| CR | PR | SD | PD | ORR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Combined group | 42 | 22 (52.38) | 14 (33.33) | 4 (9.52) | 2 (4.76) | 85.71% (36/42) |
| Single chemotherapy group | 42 | 16 (38.10) | 11 (26.19) | 9 (21.43) | 6 (14.29) | 64.29% (27/42) |
|
| 4.200 | |||||
|
| <0.05 |
Figure 2Comparison of cellular immune levels after treatment between the two groups (mean ± SD, n = 42). (a) Comparison of the CD4+/CD8+ level values after treatment between the two groups. The horizontal axis indicates the combined group and the single chemotherapy group, and the vertical axis indicates the values. The mean CD4+/CD8+ level values of the combined group and the single chemotherapy group after treatment were 1.55 ± 0.19 and 1.30 ± 0.16, respectively. indicates a significant difference in the mean CD4+/CD8+ level values after treatment between the two groups (t = 6.523, P < 0.001). (b) The comparison of the NK cell level values after treatment between the two groups. The horizontal axis indicates the combined group and the single chemotherapy group, and the vertical axis indicates the values in %. The mean NK cell level values of the combined group and the single chemotherapy group after treatment were 25.56 ± 1.72% and 19.13 ± 1.27%, respectively. indicates a significant difference in the mean NK cell level values after treatment between the two groups (t = 19.490, P < 0.001).
Figure 3Comparison of level values of serum tumor markers between the two groups (mean ± SD, n = 42). (a) The comparison of the CA125 level values after treatment between the two groups. The horizontal axis indicates the combined group and the single chemotherapy group, and the vertical axis indicates the values in U/ml. After treatment, the CA125 level values of the combined group and the single radiotherapy group were 37.39 ± 3.07 and 45.34 ± 3.07, respectively. indicates a significant difference in CA125 level values after treatment between the two groups (t = 11.867, P < 0.001). (b) The comparison of the CEA level values after treatment between the two groups. The horizontal axis indicates the combined group and the single chemotherapy group, and the vertical axis indicates the values in μg/L. After treatment, the CEA level values of the combined group and the single radiotherapy group were 6.31 ± 0.58 and 11.74 ± 1.24, respectively. indicates a significant difference in CEA level values after treatment between the two groups (t = 25.706, P < 0.001).
Comparison of survival rates between the two groups (n(%)).
| Group | 1-year survival rate | 2-year survival rate | 3-year survival rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Combined group | 38 (90.48%) | 32 (76.19%) | 26 (61.90%) |
| Single chemotherapy group | 30 (71.43%) | 23 (54.76%) | 14 (33.33%) |
|
| 4.941 | 4.266 | 6.873 |
|
| <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
Comparison of toxic and side effects between the two groups.
| Group | Gastrointestinal reaction | Neutropenia | Radiodermatitis | Renal dysfunction | Leukopenia | Total incidence rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Combined group | 2 (4.76) | 1 (2.38) | 1 (2.38) | 1 (2.38) | 2 (4.76) | 16.67% (7/42) |
| Single radiotherapy group | 5 (11.90) | 3 (7.14) | 0 (0.00) | 3 (7.14) | 4 (9.52) | 35.71% (15/42) |
|
| 3.941 | |||||
|
| <0.05 |