http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Jinghe Lang (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Xinxin Zhu,Jinghe Lang 대한부인종양학회 2017 Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Vol.28 No.5
Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and its ligand are part of the immune checkpoint pathway that down-regulates effector T cells in immune response, thereby causing immune suppression. The PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway can be blocked by antibodies to reverse tumor-mediated immunosuppression. However, advanced cancers such as stage III–IV ovarian cancer (OC) and certain types such as ID8 OC (a clone of C57BL/6 mouse OC) may hijack the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway to escape immune attack. When combined with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or other agents, these PD-1/PD-L1 pathway blockages can produce a synergistic antitumor response in OC. Combined immunotherapy significantly prolongs overall survival by changing the tumor microenvironment through processes such as increasing the number of CD4+ or CD8+ T cells or cytokines in mice with OC and decreasing the number of regulatory T cells (Tregs) and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). OC patients treated with combined immunotherapy received better prognoses than those treated with monotherapy. This review reflects the move toward novel therapy combinations for OC and discusses these promising immunotherapeutic approaches, which are more cost-effective and effective than other approaches.
-
Pengfei Li,Lan Chen,Yan Ni,Jiaqi Liu,Donglin Li,Jianxin Guo,Zhihua Liu,Shuangling Jin,Yan Xu,Zhiqiang Li,Lu Wang,Xiaonong Bin,Jinghe Lang,Ping Liu,Chunlin Chen 대한부인종양학회 2021 Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Vol.32 No.2
Objective: To compare 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates oflaparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) forstage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm with visible or invisible tumors. Methods: We retrospectively compared the oncological outcomes of 1,484 cervical cancerpatients with IB1 and tumor size <2 cm on final pathology, who received ARH (n=899) or LRH(n=585) between January 2004 and December 2016. Patients were divided into visible tumorsubgroup (ARH: n=668, LRH: n=444) and invisible tumor subgroup (ARH: n=231, LRH:n=141) according to tumor type. Results: LRH and ARH showed similar 5-year DFS and OS rates (93.3% vs. 93.1%, p=0.997;96.2% vs. 97.5%, p=0.351) in total study population. LRH was not associated with worse5-year DFS rate (hazard ratio [HR]=0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.58–1.58; p=0.871)or OS rate (HR=1.37; 95% CI=0.65–2.89; p=0.409) by multivariable analysis. In the visibletumor subgroups, LRH and ARH showed similar 5-year DFS and OS rates (91.9% vs. 91.9%,p=0.933; 95.0% vs. 96.9%, p=0.276), and LRH was not associated with worse 5-year DFS orOS rate (p=0.804, p=0.324). In the invisible tumor subgroups, LRH and ARH also showedsimilar 5-year DFS and OS rates (97.3% vs. 97.1%, p=0.815; 100% vs. 99.5%, p=0.449), andLRH was not associated with worse 5-year DFS rate (p=0.723). Conclusions: Among patients with stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm, whether the tumor isvisible or not, the oncological outcomes of LRH and ARH among cervical cancer patients arecomparable. This suggests that LRH may be suitable for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm withvisible or invisible tumors.Trial Registration: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Identifier: CHiCTR180017778
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
