Advances in Clinical Medicine
Vol. 13  No. 10 ( 2023 ), Article ID: 73409 , 5 pages
10.12677/ACM.2023.13102180

贝伐珠单抗治疗放射性脑水肿临床疗效 观察

巩佃霞1,周润泽2*,董凤祥1,张瑞程1

1青岛大学医疗集团莒县人民医院肿瘤科,山东 日照

2青岛大学医疗集团莒县人民医院神经内科,山东 日照

收稿日期:2023年9月6日;录用日期:2023年10月1日;发布日期:2023年10月9日

摘要

目的:评估贝伐珠单抗在治疗放射性脑水肿中的疗效及安全性。方法:将46例放射性脑水肿患者随机分为试验组与对照组,试验组于放疗前5天使用贝伐珠单抗5 mg/Kg,每2周应用一次至放疗后1个月,患者出现高颅压症状(头痛、恶心、呕吐、肢体活动障碍等)时应用甘露醇和地塞米松。对照组仅在患者出现高颅压症状时应用甘露醇和地塞米松。所有患者均于放疗前、放疗后1月行颅脑增强MRI检查。比较两组脑水肿的改善情况及患者ECOG评分改善情况、安全性。结果:贝伐珠单抗联合常规治疗较单纯常规治疗对改善脑水肿的有效率明显提高(P < 0.05),差别有统计学意义,生活质量明显改善(P < 0.05),差别有统计学意义,试验组未出现3级以上毒副作用。结论:应用贝伐珠单抗可减轻放射性脑水肿,提高患者生活质量,安全性可耐受。

关键词

贝伐珠单抗,放射性脑水肿

Clinical Efficacy Observation of Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Radiation-Induced Cerebral Edema

Dianxia Gong1, Runze Zhou2*, Fengxiang Dong1, Ruicheng Zhang1

1Department of Oncology, Juxian People’s Hospital, Qingdao University Medical Group, Rizhao Shandong

2Department of Neurology, Juxian People’s Hospital, Qingdao University Medical Group, Rizhao Shandong

Received: Sep. 6th, 2023; accepted: Oct. 1st, 2023; published: Oct. 9th, 2023

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in the treatment of radiation cerebral oedema. Methods: Forty-six patients with radiation cerebral edema were randomly divided into experimental group and control group, and the experimental group was given bevacizumab 5mg/kg 5 days before radiotherapy, applied once every 2 weeks to 1 month after radiotherapy, and mannitol and dexamethasone were applied when the patients had symptoms of high intracranial pressure (headache, nausea, vomiting, limb movement disorders, etc.). The control group should only use mannitol and dexamethasone when the patient has symptoms of high intracranial pressure. All patients underwent MRI with contrast to the brain before and 1 month after radiotherapy. The improvement of cerebral edema and the improvement of ECOG score and safety of the two groups were compared. Results: The effectiveness of bevacizumab combined with conventional treatment in improving cerebral edema was significantly higher than that of conventional treatment alone (P < 0.05), the difference was statistically significant, and the quality of life was significantly improved (P < 0.05), the difference was statistically significant, and there were no toxic side effects above grade 3 in the experimental group. Conclusion: The application of bevacizumab can reduce radiation cerebral edema, improve the quality of life of patients, and be tolerated safely.

Keywords:Bevacizumab, Radiation-Induced Cerebral Edema

Copyright © 2023 by author(s) and Hans Publishers Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

1. 引言

放射性脑损伤是头颈部原发肿瘤、继发肿瘤及血管畸形等放射治疗后出现的严重并发症之一,而放射性脑水是肿瘤放射性脑损伤中常见的一种。临床中有很多患者于放疗中及放疗后出现不同程度的脑水肿,引起头痛、恶心、呕吐、肢体活动障碍加重等症状,严重影响患者的生活质量及后续治疗。对于放疗引起的脑水肿常用的治疗手段是脱水剂及糖皮质激素,但疗效有限。近年来关于贝伐珠单抗可有效改善脑水肿的报道屡见不鲜 [1] [2] [3] ,但贝伐单抗的用药时机及剂量、时长并不一致。本研究通过随机对照研究探讨贝伐珠单抗在治疗放射性脑水肿中的价值。

2. 材料与方法

2.1. 患者入组标准

2018.10~2023.1莒县人民医院收治的接受放疗的颅脑恶性肿瘤患者,包括颅内原发恶性肿瘤及继发恶性肿瘤,需经病理学证实为恶性肿瘤,年龄18~75岁,ECOG评分 ≤ 2,预期生命 ≥ 6个月,颅内病灶 ≤ 3个。

2.2. 试验方法

符合入组条件患者随机分为2组,试验组于放疗前5天使用贝伐珠单抗5 mg/Kg,,每2周应用一次至放疗后1个月,患者出现高颅压症状(头痛、恶心、呕吐、肢体活动障碍等)时应用甘露醇125 mL,地塞米松5 mg。对照组仅在患者出现高颅压症状时应用甘露醇125 mL,地塞米松5 mg。所有患者均于放疗前、放疗后1月行颅脑增强MRI检查。入组患者46例,男性29例,女性17例,年龄35~75岁。其中脑胶质细胞瘤11例,接受了调强放疗DT54-60Gy/27-30f/5-6w;肺癌脑转移瘤29例,乳腺癌脑转移瘤6例,转移瘤个数1~3个,转移瘤患者均接受立体定向放疗,DT45-50Gy/10f/2w。两组患者一般资料见表1

Table 1. General information of two groups of patients

表1. 两组患者一般资料

2.3. 观察指标

1) 总有效率 = (显效 + 有效病例数)/总病例数 × 100%,显效:脑水肿范围较用治疗前缩小大于75%;有效:脑水肿范围较用治疗前缩小25%~74%;无效:脑水肿范围治疗前缩小小于24%;进展:脑水肿范围较治疗前增大。2) 评估放疗前后患者体力状况ECOG评分。

2.4. 统计方法

采用SPSS17.0软件进行统计学分析,计数资料以百分数(%)表示,采用χ2检验,计量资料以“ x ¯ ± s ”表示,采用t检验,以P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

3.1. 治疗总有效率比较

两组患者治疗总有效率有差异,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表2

Table 2. Comparison of total effective rates between two groups of patients [cases (%)]

表2. 两组患者治疗总有效率比较[例(%)]

3.2. ECOG评分比较

治疗前,两组患者ECOG评分比较,差异无统计学意义;治疗后,两组患者ECOG评分优于治疗前,且试验组明显优于对照组,差异有统计学意义。见表3

Table 3. Comparison of ECOG scores between two groups

表3. 两组ECOG评分比较

4. 讨论

放射性脑水肿是放射治疗的严重并发症,它会给患者带来较大痛苦,使患者生活质量大幅度下降,而目前针对这并发症的诊治尚无统一指南。糖皮质激素是常用的一线治疗药物,但疗效短暂,且长期应用会带来严重并发症。2007年Gonzalez等人 [4] 首次报道了贝伐单抗可作为伴有神经症状的顽固性脑水肿治疗的一种选择。放射性脑水肿的发病机制主要是由于正常脑组织被射线照射后出现毛细血管损伤,引起血管内皮的通透性改变,增强了血脑屏障通透性,引起病变周围水肿 [5] 。血管损伤机制中VEGF的过表达是目前 热门的研究靶点之一 [6] [7] 。贝伐珠单抗是一种人源化单克隆抗体,可竞争性的与VEGF结合,阻止VEGF与内皮细胞表面受体结合减少血管形成,改善血管通透性,所以贝伐珠单抗是通过对血管的修剪,来缓解脑水肿,从而缓解患者临床症状,提高患者生活质量 [8] [9] [10] 。临床上也已有很多研究证实贝伐珠单抗可以有效改善放射性脑水肿。早在7年前Sadraei等 [11] 就对使用贝伐珠单抗治疗放射性脑损伤的24例患者临床评估,认为影像和临床上都获得较好的疗效。Sanders等 [12] 人研究也曾提出贝伐珠单抗使用后约有80%的患者病情得到改善,于使用后8周临床症状就能较前改善,大多数于治疗3周期后就明显改善。最近Liao等人的研究 [13] 提出贝伐珠单抗可改善放射性脑水肿患者的认知功能,比以皮质类固醇为基础的治疗更有效。尽管关于此类的报道很多,在临床上的疗效及安全性较好,但是对于贝伐珠单抗在放射性脑水肿的治疗中,治疗最佳时机、远期疗效以及后期的耐药问题仍需要大样本的临床试验进一步研究。

本研究结果提示放疗前、中、后应用贝伐珠单抗较单纯降颅压治疗可预防放射性脑水肿的发生,明显降低脑水肿的程度,减少糖皮质激素的应用,明显改善患者的生活质量,无3级以上毒性反应发生。放射性脑水肿的发生可能与血脑屏障通透性改变或肿瘤进展有关 [14] 。贝伐珠单抗不但可以通过改善血管通透性,减轻脑水肿,同时可抑制肿瘤血管生成,抑制肿瘤生长 [15] [16] [17] 。本研究证实了贝伐珠单抗在预防和治疗放射性脑水肿方面是安全有效的。这与既往研究结果一致 [18] [19] 。

声明

本研究获医学伦理学委员会的批准,研究对象知情同意。

文章引用

巩佃霞,周润泽,董凤祥,张瑞程. 贝伐珠单抗治疗放射性脑水肿临床疗效观察
Clinical Efficacy Observation of Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Radiation-Induced Cerebral Edema[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(10): 15588-15592. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.13102180

参考文献

  1. 1. 李庆岗, 刘锐, 张剑宁. 贝伐珠单抗联合替莫唑胺胶囊治疗复发胶质母细胞瘤[J]. 转化医学杂志, 2018, 7(3): 144-147.

  2. 2. 项威, 陈东, 胡继良, 等. 贝伐单抗联合化疗治疗复发高级别胶质瘤的疗效观察及安全性分析[J]. 临床神经外科杂志, 2015, 12(4): 269-273.

  3. 3. Li, J., He, J., Cai, L.B., et al. (2021) Bevacizumab as a Treatment for Radiation Necrosis Following Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases: Clinical and Radiation Dosimetric Impacts. Annals of Palliative Medicine, 10, 2018-2026. https://doi.org/10.21037/apm-20-2417

  4. 4. Gonzalez, J., Kumar, A.J., Conrad, C.A., et al. (2007) Effect of Bevacizumab on Radiation Necrosis of the Brain. International Journal of Ra-diation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 67, 323-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.010

  5. 5. 容小明, 唐亚梅. 贝伐珠单抗治疗放射性脑损伤的临床观察[J]. 中华放射医学与防护杂志, 2013, 33(5): 56-65.

  6. 6. Piskunov, A.K., Nikitin, K.V., Potapov, A.A. (2015) Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Radiation-Induced Brain Injury: Can Peripheral Markers Be Detected? Zhurnal Voprosy Neirokhirurgii Imeni N. N. Burdenko, 79, 90-96. https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro201579190-96

  7. 7. Greene-Schloesser, D., Robbins, M.E., Peiffer, A.M., et al. (2021) Radiation Induced Brain Injury: A Review. Frontiers in Oncology, 2, 73-74. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2012.00073

  8. 8. Li, Y., Huang, X., Jiang, J., et al. (2018) Clinical Variables for Pre-diction of the Therapeutic Effects of Bevacizumab Monotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients with Radiation Induced Brain Necrosis. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 100, 621-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.11.023

  9. 9. Xu, Y.T., Rong, X.M., Hu, W.H., et al. (2018) Bevacizumab Monotherapy Reduces Radiation-Induced Brain Necrosis in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients: A Randomized Con-trolled Trial. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 101, 1087-1095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.068

  10. 10. Delishaj, D., Ursino, S., Pasqualetti, F., et al. (2017) Bevaci-zumab for the Treatment of Radiation-Induced Cerebral Necrosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, 9, 273-280. https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr2936e

  11. 11. Sadraei, N.H., Dahiya, S., Chao, S.T., et al. (2015) Treatment of Cerebral Radiation Necrosis with Bevacizumab: The Cleveland Clinic Experience. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 38, 304-310. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e31829c3139

  12. 12. Sanders, J., Nordström, H., Sheehan, J. and Schlesinger, D. (2019) Gamma Knife Radiosurgery: Scenarios and Support for Re-Irradiation. Physica Medica, 68, 75-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.11.001

  13. 13. Liao, G.X., Qian, Y.T. Arooj, S., et al. (2021) Radiation Plus An-ti-PD-1 Therapy for NSCLC Brain Metastases: A Retrospective Study. Frontiers in Oncology, 11, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.742971

  14. 14. Johansen, M.D., Urup, T., Holst, C.B., et al. (2018) Outcome of Bevacizumab Therapy in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Treated with Angiotensin System Inhibitors. Cancer In-vestigation, 36, 512-519. https://doi.org/10.1080/07357907.2018.1544639

  15. 15. 王浩, 胡深, 冯诣, 等. 贝伐单抗向治疗重度脑水肿临床研究及评估[J]. 临床军医杂志, 2016, 44(9): 904-906.

  16. 16. Kim, M.M., Umemura, Y. and Leung, D. (2018) Bevaci-zumab and Glioblastoma Past, Present, and Future Directions. The Cancer Journal, 24, 180-186. https://doi.org/10.1097/PPO.0000000000000326

  17. 17. Furuse, M., Nonoguchi, N., Kawabata, S., et al. (2015) In-tratumoral and Peritumoral Post-Irradiation Changes, But Not Viable Tumor Tissue, May Respond to Bevacizumab in Previously Irradiated Meningiomas. Radiation Oncology, 10, Article No. 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0446-0

  18. 18. Zhuang, H., Yuan, X., Zheng, Y., et al. (2016) A Study on the Evaluation Method and Recent Clinical Efficacy of Bevacizumab on the Treatment of Radiation Cerebral Necrosis. Scientific Reports, 6, Article No. 24364. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep24364

  19. 19. Voss, M., Wenger, K.J., Fokas, E., et al. (2021) Single-Shot Bevacizumab for Cerebral Radiation Injury. BMC Neurology, 21, Article No. 77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-021-02103-0

  20. NOTES

    *通讯作者。

期刊菜单