论文部分内容阅读
目的 探讨部分微量元素与直肠癌发病的关系。方法 采用原子吸收分光光度计对６０ 例直肠癌患者的癌组织，非病变组织及血清中铜、锌、铁、锰、钙、铬、镉水平及铜／锌比值进行测定，采用ｔ 检验和非条件ｌｏｇｉｓｔｉｃ 回归多因素分析方法对测定结果进行分析。结果 直肠癌患者血清、癌组织中铜、镉水平和铜／ 锌比值与健康对照组和非病变组织比较明显高；而锌、锰、钙、铬水平则明显低，均差异有显著性（Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５ 、Ｐ＜ ０ ．００１） 。蕈伞型癌组织中铜水平和铜／锌比值高于溃疡型，而锌低于溃疡型，差异有显著性（ 均Ｐ＜ ０．０１） 。在癌组织和非病变组织中最终进入方程的元素有锌，与直肠癌的相对危险度（ＯＲ） 为０ ．３０５１ ，９５ ％ 可信限ＣＩ为０ ．１５４９～０ ．６０１１ 。在癌患者和健康人血清的比较中，最终进入方程的元素有铜、锌、锰和钙，与直肠癌ＯＲ 值（９５ ％ ＣＩ） 分别为２９．４４（４ ．１７４８ ～２０７ ．６２２８） 、０ ．０９６０ （０．０１６２ ～０ ．５６７９）、０ ．０４２６ （０ ．００２８ ～５９ ．７１２６） 、０ ．９６４６（０．９３５４ ～０ ．９９４７） ，经χ２ 检验均差异有显著性（ Ｐ＜ ０ ．０５、Ｐ＜ ０ ．００１） 。?
Objective To explore the relationship between some trace elements and the pathogenesis of rectal cancer. Methods The levels of copper, zinc, iron, manganese, calcium, chromium, cadmium, and copper/zinc ratios in cancer tissues, non-lesionous tissues, and serum of 60 patients with rectal cancer were measured by atomic absorption spectrophotometer. The t-test was used. Conditional logistic regression multivariate analysis methods were used to analyze the assay results. Results The levels of copper, cadmium and copper/zinc in serum and cancer tissues of rectal cancer patients were significantly higher than those in healthy controls and non-lesioned tissues, but the levels of zinc, manganese, calcium, and chromium were significantly lower, with significant differences (P < 0.05). < 0 .05, P< 0 .001). The copper level and copper/zinc ratio were higher in sputum cancer tissue than in ulcer type, and zinc was lower than ulcer type, with significant difference (all P<0.01). In the cancerous and non-lesional tissues, zinc was the last element that entered the equation, and the relative risk (OR) for rectal cancer was 0. 3051, 95% confidence limit CI is 0. 1549~0. 6011. In the comparison of serum from cancer patients and healthy people, the elements that eventually entered the equation were copper, zinc, manganese, and calcium, and the rectal cancer OR value (95% CI) was 29.44 (4.1748-207.6228), respectively. 0 . 0960 (0.0162 to 0.5679), 0. 0426 (0.0028 to 59.7126), 0. 9646 (0.9354 to 0.9947) were significantly different by χ2 test (P<0.05, P<0.001). ?