甲状腺乳头状癌淋巴结转移对预后影响的系列研究
[Abstract]:The incidence of cervical lymph node metastasis in patients with papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) is higher, about 20% ~ 50%, and it also affects the recurrence and mortality of PTC patients. The prognostic value of LR in predicting the risk of DM in PTC patients was evaluated by distant metastasis (DM), and the prognostic value of LR and the number of lymph node metastases (LNs) in predicting the response to treatment after 131I in PTC patients was further compared in the third part. Value. The three parts of the study are reported as follows: Part I: Predictive effect of LR on the treatment response of patients with PTC after 131I. Objective: To investigate the relationship between LR and clinical outcome after 131I nail removal and its predictive value. Patients with distant metastatic PTC were divided into four groups according to LR: group I (0-10%), group II (10-25%), group III (25-50%) and group IV (50%). After a median follow-up of 20.7 months, the patients were divided into four groups: excellent response (ER), inaccurate response (IDR), and poor serological response (BIR). Comparing the basic clinical characteristics of the four groups, there was no difference in clinical outcomes; using receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) curve to evaluate the value of LR in predicting ER and to determine the best predictive threshold point, further unifying multiple factors Results: There was no significant difference in sex, T stage (P 0.05). The age of group I was significantly higher than that of the other three groups (F = 6.114, P = 0.001). With the increase of LR, the clinical prognosis to ER showed a downward trend, while the BIR and SIR showed an overall upward trend. The response ER rate was significantly lower than that of the other three groups (27.8%) and was more likely to be BIR (27.80%) and SIR (11.10%) (H = 18.816, P = 0.000). LR could be an independent predictor of ER (OR = 10.011, P = 0.000). When it was 52.27%, it had a higher specificity for predicting ER (95.09%) and the area under ROC curve was 0.668 (P = 0.002). Conclusion: With the increase of LR, patients with 131I nail clearance therapy had higher specificity (OR = 10.011, P = 0.000). The LR threshold of 52.27% could be used as an independent and specific predictor of clinical outcome in patients with PTC after 131I. Part II: The predictive role of LR in the risk of distant metastasis in patients with PTC Objective: To explore the relationship between LR and DM in patients with PTC and its predictive value for DM. Methods: 162 patients with PTC were followed up. They were divided into non-DM group (M0 group) and DM group (M1 group) with 41 cases and non-DM group (M0 group) with 121 cases. The basic pathological characteristics of the two groups were compared by t test and_2 test. The significance of LR in predicting DM was evaluated by multivariate analysis. The predictive value of LR and LNs for DM was evaluated by ROC curve and the best diagnostic threshold, and Kaplan-Meier curve was further used. The cumulative risk of DM in LN and LNs was assessed by Log-rank analysis. Results: There was no significant difference in age and multifocal sex between the two groups (P 0.05). There were significant differences in male (2 = 13.039, P = 0.000), extraglandular invasion (2 = 2.941, P = 0.000) and lesion size (t = - 4.485, P = 0.000). Independent factors (OR = 1.133, P = 0.000), with the increase of LR, the risk of DM in LNs < 15 group was significantly higher than that in LNs < 15 group (P = 0.0002). Conclusion: LR can be used as an independent predictor of DM, and its combination with LNs can better predict the risk of DM. Part III: Comparing the predictive value of LR and LNs on the treatment response of patients with PTC Objective: To explore the LR and LNs in patients with PTC. The predictive value of 131I response in patients with PTC under different number of dissected LNs (DLNs) was evaluated. Methods: 384 PTC patients treated with 131I were enrolled and divided into ER, IDR, BIR and SIR after a median follow-up of 25.7 months. Results: Among the patients with DLNs < 10, the area under the ROC curve of LR was larger than that of LNs (LR: 0.687, LNs: 0.556, P = 0.02), while the area under the ROC curve of LR was smaller than that of LNs. Element analysis showed that LR (OR = 1.037, P = 0.001) and ps-Tg (OR = 1.056, P = 0.01) were independent predictors of ER when DLNs were less than 10, while LNs could not be independent predictors (OR = 0.752, P = 0.09), while LNs (OR = 1.062, P = 0.04), ps-Tg (OR = 1.071, P = 0.00) and gender (OR = 0.570, P = 0.02) were independent predictors of ER when DLNs were 10. When Ns is less than 10, LR has a good predictive value for ER, while DLNs10 and LNs are more meaningful for ER prediction.
【学位授予单位】:青岛大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:R736.1
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 Bollschweiler E.;Baldus S.E.;Schr銉der W. ;A.H. H銉lscher;张红凯;;食管黏膜下鳞状细胞癌及腺癌的高淋巴结转移率[J];世界核心医学期刊文摘(胃肠病学分册);2006年08期
2 查勇;寸英丽;马春笋;陈真;杨步荣;黄云超;;胃癌根治术后淋巴结转移率与患者预后的关系[J];肿瘤防治研究;2011年07期
3 靳明林,詹新恩,石彦;结直肠癌淋巴结转移规律的临床研究[J];肿瘤防治研究;2001年03期
4 董芳莉,王瑾,郭梅,赵卫江;食管癌淋巴结转移的临床病理因素[J];中国肿瘤临床与康复;2003年04期
5 蒋会勇,卿三华,齐德林,周正端,黄祥成,张福明,盛权根;结直肠癌淋巴结转移多因素分析[J];中国胃肠外科杂志;2000年02期
6 范增慧;赵俊华;赵玉霞;门桐林;曹丽艳;苏洪新;;按第七版肺癌T分期和新分级与淋巴结转移关系分析[J];现代肿瘤医学;2012年01期
7 李晨;杜晓辉;陈凛;;胃癌淋巴结转移率分期的研究现状[J];解放军医学院学报;2014年06期
8 伊斯刊达尔,帕丽达,王海峰,阿合力,张瑾熔,许素玲;食管癌淋巴结转移的临床病理因素分析[J];中国肿瘤临床;2004年10期
9 覃新干;林进令;黄源;陈俊强;曾健;陆云飞;廖清华;林坚;;进展期胃癌淋巴结转移影响因素的分析[J];中国现代医生;2008年31期
10 高菁菁;赵娟;杨明;马志刚;陆海波;;淋巴结转移率对胃癌预后价值的评价[J];现代生物医学进展;2012年18期
相关会议论文 前10条
1 陈涛;任波;应青山;;淋巴结转移率在淋巴结转移乳腺癌患者预后中的作用[A];2013华东胸部肿瘤论坛暨第六届浙江省胸部肿瘤论坛论文集[C];2013年
2 陈涛;任波;应青山;;淋巴结转移率在淋巴结转移乳腺癌患者预后中的作用[A];2013年浙江省外科学学术年会论文汇编[C];2013年
3 刘德贵;;中心型非小细胞肺癌侵及深度与淋巴结转移的关系[A];第四届中国肿瘤学术大会暨第五届海峡两岸肿瘤学术会议论文集[C];2006年
4 王英炜;朱宏;宋月佳;戚基萍;刘娜;;甲状腺透明变梁状肿瘤与甲状腺乳头状癌的分析[A];中华医学会病理学分会2009年学术年会论文汇编[C];2009年
5 郑薇;张桂芝;谭建;;甲状腺乳头状癌胸骨转移2例病例报道[A];天津市生物医学工程学会第30次学术年会暨生物医学工程前沿科学研讨会论文集[C];2010年
6 岳林先;马懿;邓立强;蔡志清;王士光;;弥漫硬化型甲状腺乳头状癌的声像图表现[A];中国超声医学工程学会第八届全国腹部超声学术会议论文汇编[C];2010年
7 李沿江;刘燕娜;黄敏;章春泉;皮小兰;蔡建华;李车英;李薇;徐翔;沈孝萍;张诗渊;;甲状腺乳头状癌声像图回顾分析[A];中国超声医学工程学会第三次全国浅表器官及外周血管超声医学学术会议(高峰论坛)论文汇编[C];2011年
8 王全;杨俊杰;沈强;唐卫华;;甲状腺乳头状癌的手术范围探讨[A];2005年浙江省外科学术会议论文汇编[C];2005年
9 严峗;;甲状腺乳头状癌的超声诊断体会[A];2012年浙江省超声医学学术年会论文集[C];2012年
10 时嘉欣;田家玮;;甲状腺乳头状癌的超声造影特点[A];中华医学会第十三次全国超声医学学术会议论文汇编[C];2013年
相关博士学位论文 前10条
1 张晖;胃食管连接部腺癌临床研究[D];安徽医科大学;2016年
2 刘欣;甲状腺乳头状癌风险评估研究[D];吉林大学;2013年
3 刘宇飞;DLC1基因的表达与甲状腺乳头状癌中淋巴管生成关系的临床研究[D];武汉大学;2014年
4 张凌;促甲状腺激素与甲状腺乳头状癌发生相关的临床基础研究[D];复旦大学;2014年
5 王璐;PRDM1在桥本甲状腺炎和甲状腺乳头状癌发生中的分子机理研究[D];第四军医大学;2015年
6 李锐;miR-29a通过靶向调节AKT3抑制甲状腺乳头状癌生长与转移的研究[D];吉林大学;2016年
7 吴靖芳;RNA干扰TFF3基因对人甲状腺乳头状癌细胞增殖与侵袭的影响及机制研究[D];河北医科大学;2016年
8 杨梅柳;LncRNA在甲状腺乳头状癌中的表达及功能分析[D];河北医科大学;2016年
9 赵水英;LDOC1在人甲状腺乳头状癌中的表达及作用机制研究[D];郑州大学;2016年
10 董帅;桥本氏甲状腺炎伴多灶性甲状腺乳头状癌的BRAF基因突变分析及预警信号的研究[D];浙江大学;2016年
相关硕士学位论文 前10条
1 武优优;淋巴结转移率评估T4期胃癌患者预后的价值研究[D];山西医科大学;2015年
2 孙庆贺;2073例甲状腺乳头状癌淋巴结转移危险因素的分析[D];山西医科大学;2016年
3 刘永宁;淋巴结转移率在进展期胃癌患者中的预后价值[D];山东大学;2016年
4 陈健;T1期非小细胞肺癌清扫肺内淋巴结的临床意义[D];大连医科大学;2016年
5 从丽红;淋巴结转移率在食管鳞状细胞癌患者中的预后价值分析[D];山东大学;2017年
6 李珊珊;T_2期NSCLC的N_1特点及影响因素分析[D];大连医科大学;2017年
7 薛晶;乳腺癌X线表现与乳腺癌分子分型[D];河北医科大学;2017年
8 焦杰;早期胃癌淋巴结转移影响因素分析及治疗策略[D];山东大学;2017年
9 何雨沁;甲状腺乳头状癌侧颈淋巴复发临床分析[D];北京协和医学院;2017年
10 王晓伟;淋巴结转移率与老年胃癌患者临床病理特征的关系[D];福建医科大学;2014年
,本文编号:2230354
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/zlx/2230354.html