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) ›› 2019, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (02) : 125 -131. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2019.02.001

所属专题: 文献

述评

低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤治疗热点
高秀1, 尹如铁1,()   
  1. 1. 四川大学华西第二医院妇产科、出生缺陷与相关妇儿疾病教育部重点实验室,成都 610041
  • 收稿日期:2019-01-01 修回日期:2019-03-12 出版日期:2019-04-01
  • 通信作者: 尹如铁

Hotspots of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia treatment

Xiu Gao1, Rutie Yin1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2019-01-01 Revised:2019-03-12 Published:2019-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Rutie Yin
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Yin Rutie, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Project of Medical Scientific Research by Development Center for Medical Science and Technology of National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People′s Republic of China(W2017QFL14)
引用本文:

高秀, 尹如铁. 低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤治疗热点[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2019, 15(02): 125-131.

Xiu Gao, Rutie Yin. Hotspots of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia treatment[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2019, 15(02): 125-131.

临床对于低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤(GTN)患者的首选治疗方案为单药化疗,常用药物为甲氨喋呤(MTX)与放线菌素-D(Act-D)。目前多数研究认为,Act-D单药化疗对于低危型GTN患者的疗效优于MTX,但是该类研究纳入的样本量与质量均不够高,尚需更多大样本、多中心随机对照试验研究、证实。虽然低危型GTN患者经单药化疗后,预后普遍较好,然而越来越多研究结果表明,根据国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)制定的《妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤临床分期与预后评分系统(FIGO 2000)》,评分为5~6分及存在转移的低危型GTN患者,对一线单药化疗方案的反应率较低,因此该类患者是否首选联合化疗方案治疗,值得探讨。笔者拟就低危型GTN的主要化疗方案、MTX及Act-D治疗低危型GTN的优势与劣势,以及低危型GTN的其他治疗策略,如2次清宫术、全子宫切除术、期待疗法的最新研究进展进行阐述,旨在为临床医师诊治该病提供参考。

Single-agent chemotherapy is the preferred treatment for patients with low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN), and the commonly used drugs are methotrexate (MTX) and actinomycin-D (Act-D). At present, most studies show that Act-D single-agent chemotherapy is more effective than MTX in treatment of low-risk GTN patients, but the samples sizes and qualities of these studies are insufficient, and more large samples, multi-center randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the conclusions. Although low-risk GTN has a generally good prognosis after single-agent chemotherapy, more and more studies have shown that low-risk GTN patients who got 5-6 scores from Clinical Staging and Prognosis Scoring Systems for Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (FIGO 2000) by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) or had metastasis shown poor response to the first-line single-agent chemotherapy. Therefore, it is worth exploring whether the combination chemotherapy is the first choice for these patients. This review focuses on elaborating the major chemotherapy regimens of low-risk GTN, the advantages and disadvantages of MTX and Act-D in the treatment of low-risk GTN, as well as other treatment strategies of low-risk GTN, such as second curettage, total hysterectomy and expectant therapy, in order to provide a reference for clinicians to diagnose and treat the disease.

[1]
FIGO Oncology Committee. FIGO staging for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia 2000. FIGO Oncology Committee[J]. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2002, 77(3): 285-287.
[2]
Yarandi F, Mousavi A, Abbaslu F, et al. Five-day intravascular methotrexate versus biweekly actinomycin-D in the treatment of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a clinical randomized trial[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2016, 26(5): 971-976.
[3]
Brown J, Naumann RW, Seckl MJ, et al. 15 years of progress in gestational trophoblastic disease: scoring, standardization, and salvage[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2017, 144(1): 200-207.
[4]
Li J, Li S, Yu H, et al. The efficacy and safety of first-line single-agent chemotherapy regimens in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a network Meta-analysis[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2018, 148(2): 247-253.
[5]
Braga A, Campos V, Filho JR, et al. Is chemotherapy always necessary for patients with nonmetastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia with histopathological diagnosis of choriocarcinoma? [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2018, 148(2): 239-246.
[6]
李洁,向阳. 低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤化疗现状及耐药发生相关因素[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2015, 31(11): 1052-1054.
[7]
Biscaro A, Braga A, Berkowitz RS. Diagnosis, classification and treatment of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Rev Bras Gynecol Obstet, 2015, 37(1): 42-51.
[8]
Verhoef L, Baartz D, Morrison S, et al. Outcomes of women diagnosed and treated for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia at the Queensland Trophoblast Centre (QTC) [J]. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol, 2017, 57(4): 458-463.
[9]
Lawrie TA, Alazzam M, Tidy J, et al. First-line chemotherapy in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2016, 6: CD007102.
[10]
Wong LC, Choo YC, Ma HK. Methotrexate with citrovorum factor rescue in gestational trophoblastic disease[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1985, 152(1): 59-62.
[11]
Khan F, Everard J, Ahmed S, et al. Low-risk persistent gestational trophoblastic disease treated with low-dose methotrexate: efficacy, acute and long-term effects [J]. Br J Cancer, 2003, 89(12): 2197-2201.
[12]
Maestá I, Nitecki R, Horowitz NS, et al. Effectiveness and toxicity of first-line methotrexate chemotherapy in low-risk postmolar gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: the New England Trophoblastic Disease Center experience [J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2018, 148(1): 161-167.
[13]
Miller CR, Chappell NP, Sledge C, et al. Are different methotrexate regimens as first line therapy for low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia more cost effective than the dactinomycin regimen used in GOG 0174?[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2017, 144(1): 125-129.
[14]
Chapman-Davis E, Hoekstra AV, Rademaker AW, et al. Treatment of nonmetastatic and metastatic low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: factors associated with resistance to single-agent methotrexate chemotherapy[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2012, 125(3): 572-575.
[15]
Osborne RJ, Filiaci V, Schink JC, et al. Phase Ⅲ trial of weekly methotrexate or pulsed dactinomycin for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2011, 29(7): 825-831.
[16]
Hasanzadeh M, Tabari A, Homae F, et al. Evaluation of weekly intramuscular methotrexate in the treatment of low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. J Cancer Res Ther, 2014, 10(3): 646-50.
[17]
Goldstein DP, Berkowitz RS, Horowitz NS. Optimal management of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Exp Rev Anticancer Ther, 2015, 15(11): 1293-1304.
[18]
Lee YJ, Park JY, Kim DY, et al. Comparing and evaluating the efficacy of methotrexate and actinomycin D as first-line single chemotherapy agents in low risk gestational trophoblastic disease[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2017, 28(2): e8.
[19]
范辰辰,冯冠芝,向阳,等. 放线菌素D单日冲击疗法治疗低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤[J]. 协和医学杂志,2017, 8(1): 25-29.
[20]
Mu X, Song L, Li Q, et al. Comparison of pulsed actinomycin D and 5-day actinomycin D as first-line chemotherapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2018, 143(2): 225-231.
[21]
Hertz R, Li MC, Spencer DB. Effect of methotrexate therapy upon choriocarcinoma and chorioadenoma[J]. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med, 1956, 93(2): 361-366.
[22]
Ross GT, Stolbach LL, Hertz R. Actinomycin D in the treatment of methotrexate-resistant trophoblastic disease in women[J]. Cancer Res, 1962, 22(8): 1015-1017.
[23]
Froeling FE, Seckl MJ. Gestational trophoblastic tumours: an update for 2014[J]. Curr Oncol Report, 2014, 16(11): 408.
[24]
Matsui H, Suzuka K, Yamazawa K, et al. Relapse rate of patients with low-risk gestational trophoblastic tumor initially treated with single-agent chemotherapy[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2005, 96(3): 616-620.
[25]
Alazzam M, Tidy J, Hancock BW, et al. First-line chemotherapy in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2012, 7: CD007102.
[26]
Taylor F, Grew T, Everard J, et al. The outcome of patients with low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia treated with single agent intramuscular methotrexate and oral folinic acid[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2013, 49(15): 3184-3190.
[27]
Sita-Lumsden A, Short D, Lindsay I, et al. Treatment outcomes for 618 women with gestational trophoblastic tumours following a molar pregnancy at the Charing Cross Hospital, 2000-2009[J]. Br J Cancer, 2012, 107(11): 1810-1814.
[28]
Eiriksson L, Wells T, Steed H, et al. Combined methotrexate-dactinomycin: an effective therapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2012, 124(3): 53-557.
[29]
Chapman-Davis E, Hoekstra AV, Rademaker AW, et al. Treatment of nonmetastatic and metastatic low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: factors associated with resistance to single-agent methotrexate chemotherapy[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2012, 125(3): 572-575.
[30]
Mousavi AS, Zamani A, Khorasanizadeh F, et al. Resistance to single-agent chemotherapy and its risk factors in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasms[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2015, 41(5): 776-783.
[31]
Garner EI, Feltmate CM, Goldstein DP, et al. The curative effect of a second curettage in persistent trophoblastic disease: a retrospective cohort survey[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2005, 99(1): 3-5.
[32]
Pezeshki M, Hancock BW, Silcocks P, et al. The role of repeat uterine evacuation in the management of persistent gestational trophoblastic disease[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2004, 95(3): 423-429.
[33]
van Trommel NE, Massuger LF, Verheijen RH, et al. The curative effect of a second curettage in persistent trophoblastic disease: a retrospective cohort survey[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2005, 99(1): 6-13.
[34]
Yarandi F, Jafari F, Shojaei H, et al. Clinical response to a second uterine curettage in patients with low-risk gestational trophoblastic disease a pilot study[J]. J Reprod Med, 2014, 59(11-12): 566-570.
[35]
Osborne RJ, Filiaci VL, Schink JC, et al. Second curettage for low-risk nonmetastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 128(3): 535-542.
[36]
Ayatollahi H, Yekta Z, Afsari E. A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial of second uterine curettage versus usual care to determine the effect of re-curettage on patients′ need for chemotherapy among women with low risk, nonmetastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasm in Urmia, Iran[J]. Int J Womens Health, 2017, 9: 665-671.
[37]
Eysbouts YK, Massuger LFAG, IntHout J, et al. The added value of hysterectomy in the management of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2017, 145(3): 536-542.
[38]
Bolze PA, Mathe M, Hajri T, et al. First-line hysterectomy for women with low-risk non-metastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia no longer wishing to conceive[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2018, 150(2): 282-287.
[1] 张曼, 李明庆, 李军苗. 当归四逆汤联合甲氨蝶呤治疗类风湿关节炎的疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 648-652.
[2] 马敏榕, 李聪, 周勤. 宫颈癌治疗研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 497-504.
[3] 林昌盛, 战军, 肖雪. 上皮性卵巢癌患者诊疗中基因检测及分子靶向药物治疗[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 505-510.
[4] 顾娟, 孙擎擎, 胡方方, 曹义娟, 祁玉娟. 子宫内膜容受性检测改善胚胎反复种植失败患者妊娠结局的临床应用[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 582-587.
[5] 周东杰, 蒋敏, 范海瑞, 高玲玲, 孔祥, 卢丹, 王丽萍. 非编码RNA在卵泡发育成熟中作用及其机制的研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 387-393.
[6] 陈荟竹, 郭应坤, 汪昕蓉, 宁刚, 陈锡建. 上皮性卵巢癌"二元论模型"的分子生物学研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 394-402.
[7] 韩春颖, 王婷婷, 李艳艳, 朴金霞. 子宫内膜癌患者淋巴管间隙浸润预测因素研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 403-409.
[8] 魏权, 张燊, 陈慧佳, 邹姮, 胡丽娜. 女性生殖道微生物群与辅助生殖技术相关性研究现状[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(02): 151-155.
[9] 刘艳艳, 谭曦, 彭雪. 妊娠合并膀胱低度恶性潜能乳头状尿路上皮肿瘤并文献复习[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(02): 212-218.
[10] 胡欧婵, 黄仲英. 不明原因复发性流产患者的治疗研究现状与展望[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(01): 16-22.
[11] 周灿坤, 李庆东, 江卓飞, 肇丽杰, 郑玉华, 柳晓春, 谢庆煌, 黄晓斌. 阴式广泛联合经阴道内镜腹膜外淋巴结切除术[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 15(06): 368-371.
[12] 孙凤兰, 周萍, 程兴璞, 张倩倩. 腹腔镜全子宫切除术对子宫肌瘤患者机体氧化应激损伤及术后并发症的影响[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 149-153.
[13] 郭志荣, 马京梅. 胎盘植入性疾病的风险评估和治疗策略[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 151-154.
[14] 吴文诗, 魏宋荃, 李桂民, 郑晓芳, 孙雯, 陈敦金, 余琳. 胎盘植入性疾病患者行子宫部分切除术后再次妊娠的临床研究[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 180-186.
[15] 毛丽丽, 林琳, 印贤琴, 孙雯, 余琳, 苏春宏. 前置胎盘合并胎盘植入患者子宫切除影响因素的研究[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(02): 93-97.
阅读次数
全文


摘要