1.Synergistic Cytotoxicity of Chemotherapeutic Agents and Tumor Necrosis Factor ? against Hepatic Carcinoma Cells in vitro
Chinese Journal of Cancer Biotherapy 1996;0(04):-
The synergistic cytotoxicity of rhTNF-? or/and six chemotherapeutic agents namely ADM, MMC, DDP, VP-16, GBP and IFO, against two human hepatic carcinoma cell lines, SMMC-7721 and BEL-7402, was examined by MTT assay. The results showed that the cytotoxic effects of six chemotherapeutic agents with rhTNF-? against two cell lines were significant. Examined cytotoxicity of rhTNF-? combined with chemotherapeutic agents, we found that rhTNF-? singnificantly enhanced cytotoxic efficacy of ADM, DDP, VP-16. The study suggested that rhTNF-? with some chemotherapeutic agents had synergistic effects. This and other preclinical studies with rhTNF-? will form the basis of clinical treatments for hepatic carcinoma patient.
2.Evaluation of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in stage Ⅳ gastrointestinal cancer
Chinese Journal of Oncology 2001;23(1):67-69
Objective To evaluate the short term and long term therapeutic effects of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy in 56 cases with stage IV gastrointestinal cancer. Methods The patients were randomly divided into two groups:35 cases in the intraperitoneally treated group and 21 cases in the intravenously treated group. The short term effects and side effects were observed. The survival time of the patients was also recorded. The survival function was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and the significance test was done by Log rank method. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in short term effects, and liver and kidney damages. Nausea, vomiting and bone marrow suppression were more severe in the intravenously treated group, while abdominal distension and pain were the major side effects in the intraperitoneally treated group. The median survival time and one year survival rate of patients in the intraperitoneally treated group were higher than those in the intravenously treated group. Conclusion For patients with stage IV gastrointestinal cancer, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapeutic agents is a better treatment of choice.
3.Evaluation of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in stage Ⅳ gastrointestinal cancer
Chinese Journal of Oncology 2001;23(1):67-69
Objective To evaluate the short term and long term therapeutic effects of intraperitoneal versus intravenous chemotherapy in 56 cases with stage IV gastrointestinal cancer. Methods The patients were randomly divided into two groups:35 cases in the intraperitoneally treated group and 21 cases in the intravenously treated group. The short term effects and side effects were observed. The survival time of the patients was also recorded. The survival function was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and the significance test was done by Log rank method. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in short term effects, and liver and kidney damages. Nausea, vomiting and bone marrow suppression were more severe in the intravenously treated group, while abdominal distension and pain were the major side effects in the intraperitoneally treated group. The median survival time and one year survival rate of patients in the intraperitoneally treated group were higher than those in the intravenously treated group. Conclusion For patients with stage IV gastrointestinal cancer, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapeutic agents is a better treatment of choice.
4.Expression of MDR1-mRNA, MRP-mRNA and LRP-mRNA in patients with non-small cell lung cancer
Junlan YANG ; Weimin DAI ; Tingzhang SHI ; Xiufang WEI
Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer 2001;4(3):175-177
Objective To investigate the expression of multidrug resistance (MDR1), multidrug resistance-associated protein (MRP) and lung resistance protein (LRP) genes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Expression of MDR1, MRP and LRP genes was detected in 30 NSCLC patients by RT-PCR method. Results The positive rates of MDR1 expression were 40% and 16.67% respectively in lung cancer tissues and normal lung tissues (P=0.045), and it was not associated with the degree of cell differentiation, histological classification and the clinical stage. The positive rates of MRP expression were 43.33% and 26.67% respectively in lung cancer tissues and normal lung tissues. Its expression was related to degree of cell differentiation (P=0.03), but not to the histological classification and the clinical stage. LRP expression of lung cancer tissues (56.67%) was much higher than that of normal tissues (P=0.000?4), and it was not associated with degree of cell differentiation, histological classification and the clinical stage. Of the 30 lung cancer specimens, 7 expressed all the three kinds of genes, and 10 expressed none of them. The coincident rate was 56.67%. Conclusion The results suggest that MDR1, MRP and LRP gene may play important roles in drug resistance in NSCLC.