Application of Response Evaluation Criteria of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Solid Tumor in advanced non-small cell lung cancer / 中国结合医学杂志

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the objectivity and comprehensiveness of Response Evaluation Criteria of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Solid Tumor (Draft, REC-TCM-ST) in application of Chinese medicine therapeutic effect in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A retrospective clinical research was used in 104 NSCLC patients in stages of III-IV, 53 cases were in Chinese medicine (CM) group and 51 cases were in Western medicine (WM) group. The therapeutic effect of the two groups was evaluated with both REC-TCM-ST and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST). Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the survival time. Kappa test method was used to test the consistency of the two kinds of evaluation results.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>According to REC-TCM-ST, the effective rate on relieving tumor mass in the CM group was significantly lower than that in the WM group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in tumor-mass stable rate (P>0.05); the symptom of weakness in the CM group was improved significantly, indicating better therapeutic effect than that in the WM group (P<0.01). Karnofsky score in the CM group was significantly better than that in the WM group (P<0.01). In terms of survival conditions, the median survival time and the survival rate of 6 months, 1 year and 2 years of the CM group were higher than the WM group. The total effective rate was 9.62%, and the total stable rate was 72.12% for 104 cases according to RECIST; while the total effective rate was 34.62%, and the total stable rate was 84.62% according to REC-TCM-ST, thus there were significant differences between the results of the two criteria (P<0.01), and there was also some consistency between them, but not satisfactory.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>REC-TCM-ST was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect of CM in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, which shows that its evaluation results can better reflect the advantages and disadvantages of CM, and the effectiveness of CM is more objective and comprehensive than RECIST, so REC-TCM-ST is worthy of further improvement and clinical expansion.</p>