切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2026, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (02) : 117 -127. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2026.02.004

论著

早期上皮性卵巢癌患者术后腹腔热灌注化疗疗效研究
刘子阳, 巫宛玳, 李征宇†()   
  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:2025-11-01 修回日期:2026-01-10 出版日期:2026-04-01
  • 通信作者: 李征宇

Efficacy of postoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with early stage epithelial ovarian cancer

Ziyang Liu, Wandai Wu, Zhengyu Li†()   

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Disease of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2025-11-01 Revised:2026-01-10 Published:2026-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhengyu Li
  • Supported by:
    Health Care Research Project of Sichuan Province(2025-1702)
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

刘子阳, 巫宛玳, 李征宇. 早期上皮性卵巢癌患者术后腹腔热灌注化疗疗效研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(02): 117-127.

Ziyang Liu, Wandai Wu, Zhengyu Li. Efficacy of postoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with early stage epithelial ovarian cancer[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2026, 22(02): 117-127.

目的

探讨早期[国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期]上皮性卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌患者手术后腹腔热灌注化疗(HIPEC)疗效。

方法

选择2022年7月至2025年4月于四川大学华西第二医院接受手术治疗，并经术中切除组织病理学检查结果确诊的243例FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期上皮性卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌患者为研究对象。根据患者术后是否接受HIPEC治疗，将其分别纳入研究组(n＝105，术后接受HIPEC治疗者)与对照组(n＝138，术后未接受HIPEC治疗者)。由于卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌3类恶性肿瘤生物学行为类似，治疗原则基本相同，而上皮性卵巢癌在卵巢癌患者中占比>90%，因此本研究将其作为整体进行研究，以下将上皮性卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌统一称为上皮性卵巢癌。采用回顾性分析方法，收集2组患者的临床病例资料与结局指标，如无进展生存(PFS)期等。采用倾向性评分匹配(PSM)方法，在研究组与对照组间进行1∶1配对，以平衡2组患者相关临床特征(年龄、FIGO临床分期、术中切除组织病理学检查结果类型等)，卡钳值设为倾向评分标准差的0.1倍。PSM后，使用Kaplan-Meier法绘制2组患者PFS曲线，通过Log-rank检验，比较2组患者PFS期。根据PSM后研究组与对照组患者年龄(≥60岁与<60岁)等不同临床指标，进一步将研究组与对照组患儿分为不同亚组，并采用单因素Cox回归亚组分析方法，探讨不同亚组患者接受HIPEC的疗效。同时，单独对研究组与对照组卵巢透明细胞癌患者重新进行PSM后，评估HIPEC是否改善卵巢透明细胞癌患者的PFS期。本研究遵循的程序符合2013年修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》要求。

结果

①经PSM后，共计158例患者(研究组与对照组各为79例)被纳入分析。PSM后，2组患者年龄、术中切除组织病理学检查结果类型、FIGO临床分期等临床资料分别比较，差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。PSM后，中位随访时间为19.2个月(0.2~41.8个月)的随访结果显示，研究组与对照组分别有6例(7.6%)、10例(12.7%)患者出现疾病进展。Log-rank检验结果显示，PSM后2组患者PFS期比较，差异无统计学意义(χ2＝1.11，P＝0.291)。单因素Cox回归亚组分析结果显示，PSM后研究组与对照组不同临床特征亚组患者的疾病进展比例分别比较，差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。②经重新PSM分析后，进一步分析62例卵巢透明细胞癌患者接受HIPEC的疗效(研究组、对照组各为31例)，中位随访时间为16.2个月(0.6~39.8个月)的随访结果显示，研究组3例(9.7%)、对照组8例(25.8%)出现疾病进展，但是Log-rank检验结果显示，PSM后研究组与对照组卵巢透明细胞癌患者PFS期比较，差异无统计学意义(χ2＝2.77，P＝0.096)。

结论

本研究结果显示，对于FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期的上皮性卵巢癌、输卵管癌及原发性腹膜癌患者，尚无证据证实其可从术后HIPEC中获益。对于FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期卵巢透明细胞癌患者，术后HIPEC则呈现潜在获益，但是获益率无有统计学意义，未来需更大样本的前瞻性、随机对照试验研究进一步研究、验证。

关键词: 卵巢肿瘤, 早期卵巢癌, 腹腔热灌注化疗, 卵巢透明细胞癌, 倾向性评分, 肿瘤分期, 女(雌)性
Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of postoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with early-stage [International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage Ⅰ-Ⅱ] epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer.

Methods

A total of 243 patients with pathologically confirmed FIGO stage Ⅰ-Ⅱ epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who underwent surgery at West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, between July 2022 and April 2025 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were divided into study group (n=105, who received postoperative HIPEC treatment) and control group (n=138, who did not receive postoperative HIPEC treatment) based on whether they received HIPEC after surgery. Due to the similar biological behaviors and essentially identical treatment principles of ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer, and given that epithelial ovarian cancer accounts for >90% of ovarian cancer cases, these three malignancies were studied as a whole in this research. Hereinafter, epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer, and primary peritoneal cancer were collectively referred to as epithelial ovarian cancer. Clinical data and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients in two groups were collected by retrospective method. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed at a 1∶1 ratio between the two groups to balance baseline characteristics (including age, FIGO stage, and histologic type, etc.), with a caliper width set at 0.1 times the standard deviation of the propensity score. After PSM, Kaplan-Meier method was used to plot the PFS curves of the two groups of patients, and the PFS period of two groups of patients was compared by the Log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression subgroup analyses were further constructed for subgroup analyses to explore the efficacy of HIPEC across different subgroups. Additionally, a separate PSM was conducted in patients with ovarian clear cell carcinoma, and the effect of HIPEC on PFS in patients with ovarian clear cell carcinoma was evaluated. This study was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association revised in 2013.

Results

①After PSM, 158 patients (79 in each group) were included in the final analysis. Post-matching, there were no statistically significant differences between two groups in age, histologic type, FIGO stage, or other clinical characteristics (all P>0.05). With a median follow-up of 19.2 months (0.2-41.8 months), disease progression occurred in 6 patients (7.6%) in study group and 10 patients (12.7%) in control group after PSM. Log-rank test showed no significant difference in PFS between two groups after PSM (χ2=1.11, P=0.291). Univariate Cox regression subgroup analysis showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of disease progression between the study group and the control group in different clinical subgroups after PSM (P>0.05). ②In the separate PSM analysis of 62 patients with ovarian clear cell carcinoma (31 cases in each group), with a median follow-up of 16.2 months (0.6-39.8 months), disease progression occurred in 3 patients (9.7%) in study group and 8 patients (25.8%) in control group. However, Log-rank test revealed no statistically significant difference in PFS between two groups of patients with ovarian clear cell carcinoma after PSM(χ2=2.77, P=0.096).

Conclusions

In this study, postoperative HIPEC does not demonstrate a significant benefit in improving PFS for patients with FIGO stage Ⅰ-Ⅱ epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. In patients with FIGO stage Ⅰ-Ⅱ ovarian clear cell carcinoma, HIPEC shows a potential trend toward benefit, although the difference did not reach statistical significance. Larger-scale prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted to further validate these findings.

Key words: Ovarian neoplasms, Early stage ovarian cancer, Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, Ovarian clear cell carcinoma, Propensity score, Neoplasm staging, Female
表1 2组早期上皮性卵巢癌患者PSM前、后相关临床资料比较[例数(%)]
临床指标 PSM前 PSM后
研究组(n＝105) 对照组(n＝138) χ2值 P值 SMD 研究组(n＝79) 对照组(n＝79) χ2值 P值 SMD
保留生育功能     4.78 0.029       <0.01a >0.999  
否 101(96.2) 122(88.4)     0.407 76(96.2) 77(97.5)     －0.066
是 4(3.8) 16(11.6)     －0.407 3(3.8) 2(2.5)     0.066
卵巢黏液性癌     2.40 0.122       <0.01a >0.999  
否 100(95.2) 124(89.9)     0.253 75(94.9) 75(94.9)     0
是 5(4.8) 14(10.1)     －0.253 4(5.1) 4(5.1)     0
卵巢透明细胞癌     1.43 0.231       0.11 0.739  
否 71(67.6) 83(60.1)     0.160 52(65.8) 50(63.3)     0.053
是 34(32.4) 55(39.9)     －0.160 27(34.2) 29(36.7)     －0.053
卵巢高级别浆液性腺癌     5.61 0.018       0.11 0.737  
否 66(62.9) 106(76.8)     －0.289 53(67.1) 51(64.6)     0.054
是 39(37.1) 32(23.2)     0.289 26(32.9) 28(35.4)     －0.054
FIGO临床分期为Ⅱ期     4.59 0.032       0.27 0.602  
否 71(67.6) 110(79.7)     －0.258 54(68.4) 57(72.2)     －0.082
是 34(32.4) 28(20.3)     0.258 25(31.6) 22(27.8)     0.082
年龄≥60岁     0.04 0.844       0.04 0.833  
否 87(82.9) 113(81.9)     0.026 66(83.5) 65(82.3)     0.034
是 18(17.1) 25(18.1)     －0.026 13(16.5) 14(17.7)     －0.034
改良虚弱指数评分≥1分     1.53 0.217       0.21 0.646  
否 87(82.9) 122(88.4)     －0.147 67(84.8) 69(87.3)     －0.071
是 18(17.1) 16(11.6)     0.147 12(15.2) 10(12.7)     0.071
术前SII≥612     <0.01 0.961       0.10 0.746  
否 40(38.1) 53(38.4)     －0.006 33(41.8) 31(39.2)     0.051
是 65(61.9) 85(61.6)     0.006 46(58.2) 48(60.8)     －0.051
术前低白蛋白血症     0.18a 0.675       0.17a 0.677  
否 100(95.2) 134(97.1)     －0.087 75(94.9) 77(97.5)     －0.115
是 5(4.8) 4(2.9)     0.087 4(5.1) 2(2.5)     0.115
手术方式     1.80 0.180       0.03 0.870  
腹腔镜 36(34.3) 59(42.8)     －0.178 30(38.0) 31(39.2)     －0.026
开腹 69(65.7) 79(57.2)     0.178 49(62.0) 48(60.8)     0.026
术中PCI评分≥2分     7.86 0.005       0 1.000  
否 64(61.0) 107(77.5)     －0.340 56(70.9) 56(70.9)     0
是 41(39.0) 31(22.5)     0.340 23(29.1) 23(29.1)     0
术中同时切除其他器官     <0.01a 0.975       <0.01a >0.999  
否 101(96.2) 134(97.1)     －0.048 76(96.2) 75(94.9)     0.066
是 4(3.8) 4(2.9)     0.048 3(3.8) 4(5.1)     －0.066
图1 PSM后2组早期上皮性卵巢癌患者PFS曲线比较注：研究组为术后接受HIPEC治疗的早期(FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期)上皮性卵巢癌患者，对照组为术后未接受HIPEC治疗的早期(FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期)上皮性卵巢癌患者。PSM为倾向性评分匹配，PFS为无进展生存，FIGO为国际妇产科联盟，HIPEC为腹腔热灌注化疗
表2 PSM后研究组与对照组早期上皮性卵巢癌患者疾病进展影响因素的单因素Cox回归亚组分析
临床指标 例数 研究组疾病进展比例(n/n′) 对照组疾病进展比例(n/n′) HR值(95%CI) P值 交互作用P值
所有患者 158 6/79 10/79 0.584(0.212~1.606) 0.297 —
保留生育功能           1.000
否 153 6/76 10/77 0.601(0.219~1.655) 0.325  
是 5 0/3 0/2 NA    
卵巢黏液性癌           1.000
否 150 6/75 10/75 0.571(0.207~1.570) 0.277  
是 8 0/4 0/4 NA    
卵巢透明细胞癌           0.239
否 102 3/52 2/50 1.413(0.236~8.456) 0.705  
是 56 3/27 8/29 0.372(0.098~1.403) 0.144  
卵巢高级别浆液性腺癌           0.478
否 104 4/53 8/51 0.463(0.139~1.539) 0.209  
是 54 2/26 2/28 1.073(0.151~7.627) 0.944  
FIGO临床分期为Ⅱ期           0.673
否 111 4/54 8/57 0.516(0.155~1.715) 0.280  
是 47 2/25 2/22 0.826(0.116~5.868) 0.849  
年龄≥60岁           0.881
否 131 5/66 7/65 0.647(0.205~2.040) 0.458  
是 27 1/13 3/14 0.583(0.059~5.738) 0.644  
改良虚弱指数评分≥1分           0.998
否 136 6/67 9/69 0.656(0.234~1.844) 0.424  
是 22 0/12 1/10 NE 1.000  
SII≥612           0.866
否 64 2/33 3/31 0.675(0.113~4.044) 0.667  
是 94 4/46 7/48 0.552(0.161~1.887) 0.343  
术前低白蛋白血症           1.000
否 152 6/75 10/77 0.595(0.216~1.637) 0.315  
是 6 0/4 0/2 NA    
手术方式           0.761
腹腔镜 61 2/30 4/31 0.472(0.086~2.580) 0.387  
开腹 97 4/49 6/48 0.654(0.184~2.321) 0.512  
术中PCI评分≥2分           0.997
否 112 6/56 7/56 0.851(0.286~2.532) 0.771  
是 46 0/23 3/23 NE 0.999  
术中同时切除其他器官           0.998
否 151 5/76 10/75 0.473(0.162~1.384) 0.172  
是 7 1/3 0/4 NE 1.000  
图2 PSM后2组早期卵巢透明细胞癌患者PFS曲线比较注：研究组为术后接受HIPEC治疗的早期(FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期)卵巢透明细胞癌患者，对照组为术后未接受HIPEC治疗的早期(FIGO临床分期为Ⅰ~Ⅱ期)卵巢透明细胞癌患者。PSM为倾向性评分匹配，PFS为无进展生存，FIGO为国际妇产科联盟，HIPEC为腹腔热灌注化疗
表3 PSM前、后，研究组与对照组早期卵巢透明细胞癌患者相关临床指标比较[例数(%)]
临床指标 PSM前 PSM后
研究组(n＝34) 对照组(n＝55) χ2值 P值 SMD 研究组(n＝31) 对照组(n＝31) χ2值 P值 SMD
保留生育功能     <0.01a >0.999       0.52a 0.471  
否 33(97.1) 53(96.4)     0.041 30(96.8) 30(96.8)     0
是 1(2.9) 2(3.6)     －0.041 1(3.2) 1(3.2)     0
FIGO临床分期为Ⅱ期     0.11a 0.735       <0.01a >0.999  
否 30(88.2) 51(92.7)     －0.139 27(87.1) 28(90.3)     －0.096
是 4(11.8) 4(7.3)     0.139 4(12.9) 3(9.7)     0.096
年龄≥60岁     0.18 0.670       0.41 0.520  
否 29(85.3) 45(81.8)     0.098 26(83.9) 24(77.4)     0.175
是 5(14.7) 10(18.2)     －0.098 5(16.1) 7(22.6)     －0.175
改良虚弱指数≥1     1.50a 0.221       0.41 0.520  
否 27(79.4) 50(90.9)     －0.284 24(77.4) 26(83.9)     －0.154
是 7(20.6) 5(9.1)     0.284 7(22.6) 5(16.1)     0.154
全身免疫炎症指数≥612     3.94 0.047       0 1.000  
否 17(50.0) 16(29.1)     0.418 14(45.2) 14(45.2)     0
是 17(50.0) 39(70.9)     －0.418 17(54.8) 17(54.8)     0
术前低白蛋白血症     0.61a 0.435       —b 1.000  
否 34(100.0) 52(94.5)     0.306 31(100.0) 30(96.8)     0.258
是 0(0) 3(5.5)     －0.306 0(0) 1(3.2)     －0.258
手术方式     2.08 0.149       0 1.000  
腹腔镜 17(50.0) 19(34.5)     0.309 14(45.2) 14(45.2)     0
开腹 17(50.0) 36(65.5)     －0.309 17(54.8) 17(54.8)     0
术中PCI指数≥2分     0.81 0.368       0.73 0.393  
否 23(67.6) 42(76.4)     －0.186 21(67.7) 24(77.4)     －0.207
是 11(32.4) 13(23.6)     0.186 10(32.3) 7(22.6)     0.207
术中同时切除其他器官     <0.01a >0.999       0.52a 0.471  
否 33(97.1) 53(96.4)     －0.048 30(96.8) 30(96.8)     0
是 1(2.9) 2(3.6)     0.048 1(3.2) 1(3.2)     0
[1]
Han B, Zheng R, Zeng H, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2022[J]. J Natl Cancer Cent, 2024, 4(1): 47-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.jncc.2024.01.006.
[2]
中华医学会妇科肿瘤学分会. 中国妇科肿瘤临床实践指南2025版上卷：卵巢癌[M]. 北京：人民卫生出版社，2025: 47.
[3]
Cancer Research UK. Early cancer diagnosis data hub[EB/OL]. [2026-02-20].

URL    
[4]
Chan JK, Tian C, Teoh D, et al. Survival after recurrence in early-stage high-risk epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2010, 116(3): 307-311. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.10.074.
[5]
Gadducci A, Cosio S, Zola P, et al. Prognostic factors and clinical outcome of patients with recurrent early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer: an Italian multicenter retrospective study[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2013, 23(3): 461-468. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e318286665b.
[6]
Kobayashi D, Kodera Y. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis[J]. Gastric Cancer, 2017, 20(Suppl 1): 111-121. DOI: 10.1007/s10120-016-0662-9.
[7]
Passot G, Vaudoyer D, Villeneuve L, et al. What made hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy an effective curative treatment for peritoneal surface malignancy: a 25-year experience with 1，125 procedures[J]. J Surg Oncol, 2016, 113(7): 796-803. DOI: 10.1002/jso.24248.
[8]
Ajani JA, D′Amico TA, Bentrem DJ, et al. Gastric cancer, version 2.2025, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2025, 23(5): 169-191. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2025.0022.
[9]
Kusamura S, Delhorme JB, Taibi A, et al. The 2022 PSOGI international consensus on HIPEC regimens for peritoneal malignancies: pseudomyxoma peritonei[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2024, 31(9): 6262-6273. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15646-6.
[10]
Schultz KS, Bansal VV, Wach MM, et al. Consensus guideline for the management of colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2025. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-025-17363-0.
[11]
Lim MC, Chang SJ, Park B, et al. Survival after hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and primary or interval cytoreductive surgery in ovarian cancer[J]. JAMA Surg, 2022, 157(5): 374-383. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.0143.
[12]
van Driel WJ, Koole SN, Sikorska K, et al. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 378(3): 230-240. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1708618.
[13]
Aronson SL, Lopez-Yurda M, Koole SN, et al. Cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OVHIPEC-1): final survival analysis of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2023, 24(10): 1109-1118. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00396-0.
[14]
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: ovarian cancer including fallopian tube cancer and primary peritoneal cancer. Version 1.2026[EB/OL]. [2026-02-20].

URL    
[15]
中国抗癌协会宫颈癌专业委员会. 妇科肿瘤腹腔热灌注治疗临床应用指南(2023年版)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2023, 39(9): 926-934. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2023090116.
[16]
Renz M, Friedlander M, Berek JS. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2025 update[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2025, 171(Suppl 1): 6-35. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.70282.
[17]
Gaillard S, Lacchetti C, Armstrong DK, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer: ASCO guideline update[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2025, 43(7): 868-891. DOI: 10.1200/JCO-24-02589.
[18]
Bhatt A, Glehen O, Zivanovic O, et al. The 2022 PSOGI international consensus on HIPEC regimens for peritoneal malignancies: epithelial ovarian cancer[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(13): 8115-8137. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13932-3.
[19]
Kumar N, Bhatt A, Sinukumar S, et al. The INDEPSO-ISPSM consensus on peritoneal malignancies-management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer[J]. Indian J Surg Oncol, 2026, 17(1): 173-200. DOI: 10.1007/s13193-025-02300-0.
[20]
Berek JS, Renz M, Kehoe S, et al. Cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: 2021 update[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2021, 155(Suppl 1): 61-85. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.13878.
[21]
中国抗癌协会宫颈癌专业委员会. 妇科肿瘤腹腔热灌注治疗临床药物应用专家共识(2024年版)[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2024, 40(1): 62-67. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2024010115.
[22]
Bektaş O, Bektaş K. Prognostic value of systemic inflammatory markers in predicting neoadjuvant platinum response and platinum resistance in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a peritoneal cancer index-based analysis[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2025, 199: 147-151. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.07.001.
[23]
Jiang R, Pan X, Shi X, et al. Prognostic and clinical value of serum albumin, cortisol and TNF-a in treatment selection for advanced ovarian cancer patients[J]. J Med Biochem, 2025, 44(8): 1710-1719. DOI: 10.5937/jomb0-57224.
[24]
Xu Z, Jiang G, Dai J. Tumor therapeutics in the era of " RECIST" ：past, current insights, and future prospects[J]. Oncol Rev, 2024, 18: 1435922. DOI: 10.3389/or.2024.1435922.
[25]
Rustin GJS, Vergote I, Eisenhauer E, et al. Definitions for response and progression in ovarian cancer clinical trials incorporating RECIST 1.1 and CA 125 agreed by the Gynecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG)[J]. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2011, 21(2): 419-423. DOI: 10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182070f17.
[26]
张琳，张师前. 《老年卵巢癌规范化手术治疗中国专家共识(2024年版)》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(6): 605-610. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2025.06.001.
[27]
Cabasag CJ, Butler J, Arnold M, et al. Exploring variations in ovarian cancer survival by age and stage (ICBP SurvMark-2): a population-based study[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2020, 157(1): 234-244. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.12.047.
[28]
Leskela S, Romero I, Cristobal E, et al. The frequency and prognostic significance of the histologic type in early-stage ovarian carcinoma: a reclassification study by the Spanish Group for Ovarian Cancer Research (GEICO)[J]. Am J Surg Pathol, 2020, 44(2): 149-161. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001365.
[29]
Di Donato V, Di Pinto A, Giannini A, et al. Modified fragility index and surgical complexity score are able to predict postoperative morbidity and mortality after cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2021, 161(1): 4-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.08.022.
[30]
Zhang S, Qie Q, Zhang Y, et al. Real-world effectiveness and safety of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer[J]. Oncologist, 2026, 31(2): oyaf424. DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyaf424.
[31]
Bogani G, Fagotti A, Chiantera V, et al. The role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in ovarian cancer[J]. Gynecol Oncol, 2025, 200: 161-168. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.07.026.
[32]
Arjona-Sánchez A, Espinosa-Redondo E, Gutiérrez-Calvo A, et al. Efficacy and safety of intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for locally advanced colon cancer: a phase 3 randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA Surg, 2023, 158(7): 683-691. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.0662.
[33]
Desiderio J, Chao J, Melstrom L, et al. The 30-year experience-A Meta-analysis of randomised and high-quality non-randomised studies of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of gastric cancer[J]. Eur J Cancer, 2017, 79: 1-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.03.030.
[34]
Corbaux P, Freyer G, Glehen O, et al. Intraperitoneal nivolumab after debulking surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: a phase Ⅰ study with expansion cohort[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2024, 30(16): 3438-3446. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-0507.
[1] 张振奇, 卢漫, 齐艺涵, 庄敏, 胡紫玥, 王璐. 基于DeepSeek大语言模型的胃癌和直肠癌超声报告结构化及T分期自动评估研究[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2025, 22(11): 1055-1061.
[2] 田湘英, 缪华章, 徐玲, 涂艳萍, 张婕, 相光华, 赵贤哲, 尚宁. 卵巢颗粒细胞瘤与卵泡膜-纤维瘤组的超声特征及临床病理分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志（电子版）, 2025, 22(04): 311-320.
[3] 张雪洛, 陈艳花, 王仙萍, 梁利霞, 张志平. 早发性卵巢功能不全患者的病因和生育策略[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(02): 109-116.
[4] 孟顺瑶, 曾靖, 尹如铁. 妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤患者免疫治疗研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(01): 1-6.
[5] 吴达莹, 李贵玲. 子宫内膜癌患者免疫治疗的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(01): 7-12.
[6] 杨光淏, 刘臻妍, 杨宏英. 聚腺苷二磷酸核糖聚合酶抑制剂与卵巢癌免疫治疗调控的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2026, 22(01): 13-18.
[7] 田海琦, 侯章梅, 李佳芮, 陈诚, 刘小艳. 妇科恶性肿瘤患者术后感染影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(06): 689-696.
[8] 张琳, 张师前. 《老年卵巢癌规范化手术治疗中国专家共识(2024年版)》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(06): 605-610.
[9] 薛绍龙, 杨博文, 郄明蓉. 《老年子宫内膜癌手术治疗中国专家共识(2024年版)》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(05): 508-515.
[10] 刘俊希, 吴瑾. 《欧洲内分泌学会指南：特纳综合征女童与妇女护理》解读[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(05): 516-524.
[11] 魏艺, 李欣, 凌秀凤, 赵纯. 改良自然周期和来曲唑诱导排卵周期中不同黄体支持方案对高龄及非高龄女性妊娠结局的影响[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(05): 568-579.
[12] 范舒舒, 李玉凤, 林莉, 龙梅, 汪成, 何金娜. 血清25-羟维生素D水平对体外受精-胚胎移植助孕患者妊娠结局的影响及其与外周血和卵泡液淋巴细胞亚群相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(05): 580-589.
[13] 何瑾, 周圣涛. 年轻早期子宫内膜癌患者保留生育功能治疗评估与临床思考[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 21(05): 495-501.
[14] 华赟鹏. 自发性破裂肝细胞癌根治性切除术后腹腔热灌注化疗的疗效及化疗药物方案的比较分析：一项回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2025, 19(05): 344-344.
[15] 刘盼, 梁宵, 刘国印, 张琼, 苗素琴. 多模式保温在肝移植围手术期的应用及对术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华移植杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(01): 46-51.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号

AI
小
编
AI小编
你好！我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编，有什么可以帮您的吗？