论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析鄂尔多斯市中心医院晚期肺腺癌患者表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)突变状态与一般临床特征的关系。方法:分析自2012年6月开始收治的Ⅲb-Ⅳ期肺腺癌患者接受EGFR 19、21外显子突变情况与患者一般临床特征、转移部位、治疗情况的关系。结果:选取123例晚期肺腺癌患者纳入分析,46.34%(57/123)的晚期肺腺癌患者接受了EGFR 19、21外显子检测,EGFR基因突变率为49.12%(28/57),其中19外显子突变率为39.29%(11/28),21外显子突变率为46.43%(13/28),19、21外显子同时突变率为14.29%(4/28)。EGFR基因突变状态在患者性别、年龄、吸烟状态、分期、体力评分和转移部位间比较未见显著性差异,19或21外显子突变在患者性别、年龄、吸烟状态、分期、体力评分和转移部位间比较未见显著性差异,根据EGFR基因突变状态选择一线治疗模有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:鄂尔多斯地区晚期肺腺癌接受EGFR敏感基因检测率为46.34%,突变率为49.12%,突变状态在一般临床特征和转移部位间未见显著性差异,根据EGFR基因突变状态患者选择一线治疗方式差异有显著意义。
Objective: To analyze the relationship between epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status and general clinical features in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma of Ordos Central Hospital. Methods: To analyze the association between EGFR 19 and 21 exon mutations in patients with stage Ⅲb-Ⅳ lung adenocarcinoma who had been treated since June 2012 and their clinical features, metastatic sites and treatment. Results: A total of 123 patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in this study. 46.34% (57/123) patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma received EGFR 19 and 21 exon detection. The rate of EGFR gene mutation was 49.12% (28/57) Among them, the exon mutation rate of 19 was 39.29% (11/28), the mutation rate of exon 21 was 46.43% (13/28), and that of 19 and 21 was 14.29% (4/28). The mutation status of EGFR gene showed no significant difference in gender, age, smoking status, staging, physical score and metastasis. The exon 19 or 21 mutation had no significant difference in patients’ gender, age, smoking status, staging, physical score and metastasis There was no significant difference between the two groups. According to the EGFR mutation status, the first-line treatment model was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion: The detection rate of EGFR sensitive gene in advanced lung adenocarcinoma of the Ordos region is 46.34%, the mutation rate is 49.12%. There is no significant difference in the general clinical features and metastatic sites between the two groups. According to the first-line treatment The difference is significant.