切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2009, Vol. 05 ›› Issue (04) : 338 -343. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2009.04.102

论著

68例儿童重型再生障碍性贫血强化免疫抑制治疗的疗效分析
陈纯, 李迎飞, 方建培, 薛红漫, 周敦华, 黄科, 徐宏贵, 郭海霞, 黄绍良   
  1. 510120 广州,中山大学附属第二医院儿科
    深圳市第三人民医院
  • 出版日期:2009-08-01

Clinical Analysis of the Efficacy of Intensive Immunosuppressive Therapy in 68 Children With Severe Aplastic Anemia

Chun CHEN, Ying-fei LI, Jian-pei FANG, Hong-man XUE, Dun-hua ZHOU, Ke HUANG, Hong-gui XU, Hai-xia GUO, Shao-liang HUANG   

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China
  • Published:2009-08-01
  • Supported by:
    * Project No. 30772367, supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
引用本文:

陈纯, 李迎飞, 方建培, 薛红漫, 周敦华, 黄科, 徐宏贵, 郭海霞, 黄绍良. 68例儿童重型再生障碍性贫血强化免疫抑制治疗的疗效分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2009, 05(04): 338-343.

Chun CHEN, Ying-fei LI, Jian-pei FANG, Hong-man XUE, Dun-hua ZHOU, Ke HUANG, Hong-gui XU, Hai-xia GUO, Shao-liang HUANG. Clinical Analysis of the Efficacy of Intensive Immunosuppressive Therapy in 68 Children With Severe Aplastic Anemia[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2009, 05(04): 338-343.

目的

探讨强化免疫抑制治疗(immunosuppressive therapy,IST)与单用环孢菌素A(cyclosporine A,CSA)治疗儿童重型再生障碍性贫血(severe aplastic anemia,SAA)间疗效差异,并研究强化免疫抑制治疗前,患儿对粒细胞集落刺激因子(granulocyte colony stimulating factor,G–CSF)反应程度与疗效的关系。

方法

2000年1月至2007年11月在中山大学附属第二医院儿科确诊的重型再生障碍性贫血患儿为68例,其中55例采用强化免疫抑制治疗(IST组),13例因经济原因采取单用环孢菌素A治疗(CSA组),比较两组疗效差异(本研究遵循的程序符合中山大学附属第二医院人体试验委员会所制定的伦理学标准,得到该委员会批准,分组征得受试对象的知情同意,并与试验患儿监护人签署临床研究知情同意书)。24例重型再生障碍性贫血患儿在强化免疫抑制治疗前做粒细胞集落刺激因子试验性治疗,根据对粒细胞集落刺激因子的反应程度,将IST组分为G–CSF反应IST亚组(n=13)与G–CSF无反应IST亚组(n=11),比较两亚组强化免疫抑制治疗后6个月及长期疗效差异。

结果

IST组和CSA组患儿治疗的平均显效时间分别为3.4个月(1~13个月)和4.5个月(1~15个月)。IST组和CSA组患儿患儿治疗后第1、第3、第6、第9及第12个月末的有效率分别为70.9%,58.2%,79.5%,87.2%和89.7% vs.46.2%,38.5%,46.2%,61.5%和61.5%。随访1年以上,IST组有效率为89.7%(35/39),CSA组患儿有效率为61.5%(8/13),两组比较,差异有显著意义(χ2=5.419,P<0.05)。G–CSF反应IST亚组及其无反应IST亚组患儿治疗6个月后,有效率分别为76.9%(10/13)和45.6%(5/11),两亚组比较,差异有显著意义(P<0.05)。G–CSF反应IST亚组患儿总有效率(92.3%,12 /13)较无反应IST亚组(54.5%,6/11)高,且差异有显著意义(P<0.05)。

结论

强化免疫抑制治疗重型再生障碍性贫血的疗效明显优于单用环孢菌素A。强化免疫抑制治疗前,对粒细胞集落刺激因子有反应的患儿,强化免疫抑制治疗的预后相对较好。

Objective

To analyze the therapeutic efficacy of intensive immunosuppressive therapy(IST) in children with severe aplastic anemia(SAA) and compared it with only cyclosporine A(CSA) therapy, and evaluate the relation between granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) reaction and therapeutic efficacy before intensive immunosuppressive therapy.

Methods

The study cohort consisted of 68 consecutive patients diagnosed as severe aplastic anemia in the Department of Pediatrics, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University between January 2000 and November 2007. Fifty-five cases of 68 patients accepted intensive immunosuppressive group (IST group), while other 13 cases received only cyclosporine A (CSA group) because of poor economy. The different therapeutic efficacy of these two regimens was analyzed. The procedure of this study was consistent with ethical standard established by the committee of investigation in human beings of Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, and it was approved by this committee. Informed consent was obtained from all participates.24 cases of severe aplastic anemia received granulocyte colony stimulating factor as experimental treatment before intensive immunosuppressive therapy according to the degree of peripheral blood count's response to granulocyte colony stimulating factor. These 24 cases were divided into reaction sub-IST group (n=13)and non-reaction sub-IST group.(n=11). The differences of therapeutic efficacy at the end of 6 months after treatment and long-term effects were observed.

Results

The average effective time of IST group and CSA group after treatment were 3.4 months(1~13 months) and 4.5 months (1~15 months), respectively. The efficacy rates of IST group and CSA group at the end of 1st, 3rd, 6th, 9th and 12th months after treatment were 70.9%, 58.2%, 79.5%, 87.2% and 89.7% vs. 46.2%, 38.5%, 46.2%, 61.5% and 61.5%, respectively. More than 1 year follow-up of 39 patients in IST group, the total efficacy rate was 89.7%(35/39). More than 1 year follow-up of 13 patients in CSA group, the total efficacy rate was 61.5%(8/13). There had statistically significant difference between two groups(χ2=5.419, P<0.05). The efficacy rates of reaction sub-IST group and non-reaction sub-IST group to granulocyte colony stimulating factor at the end of 6th months after treatment were 76.9% and 45.6%, respectively.There had no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05). The total efficacy rates of reaction sub-IST group and non-reaction sub-IST group to granulocyte colony stimulating factor were 92.3%, (12/13)and 54.5%(6/11), respectively.The former was significant higher than that of the latter. There was statistically significant difference in these two groups(P<0.05). The efficacy of intensive immunosuppressive therapy was better than that of single-use cyclosporine A. The average effective time of IST group and CSA group after treatment were 3.4 months and 4.5 months, respectively. The efficacy of IST group and CSA group at 1 year after treatment were 89.7% and 61.5%, respectively. The total efficacy rate of reaction sub-IST group and non-reaction sub-IST group to granulocyte colony stimulating factor were 92.3% and 54.5%, respectively.

Conclusion

The therapeutic efficacy of intensive immunosuppressive therapy in children with severe aplastic anemia is better than that of cyclosporine A therapy only. Children with severe aplastic anemia who responded well to granulocyte colony stimulating factor had a better prognosis in the intensive immunosuppressive therapy.

1 Bacigalupo A, Hows J, Gordon–Smith EC, et al. Bone marrow transplantation for severe aplastic anemia from donors other than HLA identical siblings: A report of the BMT Working Party. Bone Marrow Transplant,1988,3(6):531–535.
2 Camitta BM, Thomas ED, Nathan DG, et al. Severe aplastic anemia: A prospective study of the effect of early marrow transplantion on acute mortality.Blood,1976,48(1):63–70.
3 Chen C, Fang JP, Huang SL,et al.The clinical analysis of the efficacy of immunosuppressive therapy in 54 children patients with severe aplastic anemia. Chin J Pediatr.2006,44(11):841–844.
4 Stary J,Locatelli F,Niemeyer CM,et al.Stem cell transplantation for aplastic anemia and myelodysplastic syndrome.Bone Marrow Transplant, 2005,35(suppl 1):S13–S16.
5 Further M,Rampf U,Baumann I,et al.Immunosuppressive therapy for aplasic anemia in children:A more severe disease predicts better survival.Blood,2005,106(6):2102–2104.
6 Jeng MR,Naidu PE,Rieman MD,et al.Granulocyte–macrophage colony stimulating factor and immunosuppression in the treatment of pediatric aquired severe aplastic anemia. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2005, 45(2): 170–175.
7 Killick SB,Marsh JC,Gordon–Smith EC,et al.Long–term outcome of aquired aplastic anemia in children:Comparison between immunosuppressive therapy and bone marrow transplantation.Br J Haematol, 2000, 111: 321–328.
8 Goldenberg NA,Graham DK,Liang X,et al.Successful treatment of severe aplastic anemia in children using standardized immunosuppressive therapy with antithymocyte globulin and cyclosporine A.Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2004,43(7):718–722.
9 Kojima S,Hibi S,Kosaka Y,et al.Immunosuppressive therapy using antithymocyte globulin,cyclosporine, and danazol with or without human granulocyte colony–stimulating factor in children with acquired apastic anemia.Blood,2000,96(6):2049–2054.
10 Scheinberg P, Wu CO, Nunez O, et al.Long–term outcome of pediatric patients with severe aplastic anemia treated with antithymocyte globulin and cyclosporine.J Pediatr,2008,153(6):814–819.
11 Lu J,Chai YH, Cao YF,et al. The clinical prophase observation of the therapeutic effect of antilymphocyte globulin combining cyclosporin A in treatment of pediatric severe aplastic anemia.China Pediatr Blood,2005, 10(3):103–105.
12 Futher M,Burdach S,Ebell W,et al.Relapse and clonal disease in chidren with aplastic anemia after immunosuppressive therapy(IST):The SAA 94 experience.German/Austrian Pediatric Aplastic Anemia Working Group. Klin Pediatr,1998,210(4):173–179.
13 De–Medeiros CR,Ribeiro RC,Bittencourt MA.Long–term outcome of 25 children and adolescents with severe aplastic anemia treated with antithymocyte globulin.Braz J Med Biol Res,2000,33(5):553–558.
14 Socie G, Mary JY, Schrezenmeier H, et al. Granulocyte–stimulating factor and severe aplastic anemia: A survey by the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT).Blood,2007 109(7): 2794–2796.
15 Shichino H,Mugishima H,Takamura M,et al.Treatment of aplastic anemia with antithymocyte globulin,cyclosporin A,methylprednisolone, danazol and recombinant human grannlocyte–colony stimulating factor. Acta Paediatr Jpn,1996,38(6):644–647.
16 Huang YL, Huang SL.Progress of immune–mediated pathogenesis and treatment in children patients with aplastic anemia. Chin J Pediatr,2006,44(2):153–155.
17 Yong NS, Maciejewski JP. Aplastic anemia. In: Ronald H. Hematology–basic principles and practice.3rd ed.Beijing :Harcourt Asia Churchill Livingstone,2001,297–331.
18 Mourad G, Garrigue V, Squifflet JP, et al. Induction versus moninduction in renal transplant recipients with tacrolimus–based immunosuppression. Transplantation,2001,72(6):1050–1055.
[1] 张璇, 马宇童, 苗玉倩, 张云, 吴士文, 党晓楚, 陈颖颖, 钟兆明, 王雪娟, 胡淼, 孙岩峰, 马秀珠, 吕发勤, 寇海燕. 超声对Duchenne肌营养不良儿童膈肌功能的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1068-1073.
[2] 张宝富, 俞劲, 叶菁菁, 俞建根, 马晓辉, 刘喜旺. 先天性原发隔异位型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图诊断[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1074-1080.
[3] 韩丹, 王婷, 肖欢, 朱丽容, 陈镜宇, 唐毅. 超声造影与增强CT对儿童肝脏良恶性病变诊断价值的对比分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 939-944.
[4] 刘婷婷, 林妍冰, 汪珊, 陈幕荣, 唐子鉴, 代东伶, 夏焙. 超声衰减参数成像评价儿童代谢相关脂肪性肝病的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 787-794.
[5] 周钰菡, 肖欢, 唐毅, 杨春江, 周娟, 朱丽容, 徐娟, 牟芳婷. 超声对儿童髋关节暂时性滑膜炎的诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 795-800.
[6] 米洁, 陈晨, 李佳玲, 裴海娜, 张恒博, 李飞, 李东杰. 儿童头面部外伤特点分析[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(06): 511-515.
[7] 中华医学会烧伤外科学分会小儿烧伤学组. 儿童烧伤早期休克液体复苏专家共识(2023版)[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 371-376.
[8] 陆闻青, 陈昕怡, 任雪飞. 遗传代谢病儿童肝移植受者术后生活质量调查研究[J]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 287-292.
[9] 王蕾, 王少华, 牛海珍, 尹腾飞. 儿童腹股沟疝围手术期风险预警干预[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 768-772.
[10] 李芳, 许瑞, 李洋洋, 石秀全. 循证医学理念在儿童腹股沟疝患者中的应用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 782-786.
[11] 彭永辉, 张文杰, 李炳根, 聂向阳, 吴凯, 杨六成. 单孔双针疝囊高位结扎术在儿童巨大腹股沟疝的临床应用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 566-569.
[12] 吕垒, 冯啸, 何凯明, 曾凯宁, 杨卿, 吕海金, 易慧敏, 易述红, 杨扬, 傅斌生. 改良金氏评分在儿童肝豆状核变性急性肝衰竭肝移植手术时机评估中价值并文献复习[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 661-668.
[13] 卓少宏, 林秀玲, 周翠梅, 熊卫莲, 马兴灶. CD64指数、SAA/CRP、PCT联合检测在小儿消化道感染性疾病鉴别诊断中的应用[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 505-509.
[14] 刘笑笑, 张小杉, 刘群, 马岚, 段莎莎, 施依璐, 张敏洁, 王雅晳. 中国学龄前儿童先天性心脏病流行病学研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(9): 1021-1024.
[15] 李静, 张玲玲, 邢伟. 兴趣诱导理念用于小儿手术麻醉诱导前的价值及其对家属满意度的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 812-817.
阅读次数
全文


摘要