4.4 Article

A clinical study of 115 patients with extranodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type

期刊

CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 20, 期 8, 页码 619-625

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2008.05.011

关键词

extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma; nasal type; prognosis factors; treatment

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To investigate the clinicopathological features, treatment outcomes, and prognostic factors in patients with extranodal natural killer (NK)/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type. Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 115 patients diagnosed with extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type who were admitted to our hospital between January 1991 and June 2006. Results: In total, 107 patients were available for follow-up. After the completion of treatment, 48 patients (44.9%) achieved a complete remission. By the end of the follow-up period, 60 patients (56.1%) had died from local recurrence or metastases. The mean survival duration was 70.0 months, the median survival duration was 42 months, and the 5-year survival rate was 39.4%. The mean survival durations of the three treatment groups of chemoradiotherapy, radiotherapy and palliative treatment were 91.6, 60.1 and 17.6 months, respectively. The median survival durations were 72.0, 42.0 and 10 months, respectively. Patients treated with > 50Gy had better local control and survival than the < 50Gy group. However, there was no significant difference between patients having fewer than four cycles of chemotherapy and patients having more than four cycles. Multifactor Cox regression model analysis showed that B symptoms, gender, International Prognostic Index (IPI) score, disease stage and therapy were all independent prognostic factors. Conclusions: The prognosis of extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type is poor and significantly influenced by B symptoms, gender, IPI score, clinical staging and the method of treatment. Chemoradiotherapy should be the first choice for treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据