Authors
Kamyshov S.V.
Republican Specialized Scientific and Practical Medical Center of Oncology and Radiology of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent
Abstract
Used for the treatment of cervical cancer (CC) chemotherapeutic methods and radiation therapy, cause immunosuppression in patients, in connection with which these patients are shown immunocorrective therapy. The methods of extracorporal immunopharmacotherapy (EIFT) are, by their nature, an effective extension of therapeutic plasma exchange. However, in the literature there is insufficient information on the use of EIFT methods in the treatment of СС, as well as their effect on the long-term results of antitumor therapy. The object of the study was 136 patients with CC with II-III clinical stages of the disease who received standard combined treatment with an average age of 45,7±7,07 years. In total, stage II was diagnosed in 90 (66,2%) and stage III in 46 (33,8%) patients. The patients were divided into the following groups: 1 group – 42 (31,0%) patients who received EIFT without plasma exchange (PF); Group 2 – 34 (25,0%) patients who received EIFT with preliminary IF; control group 3 – 60 (44,1%) patients without immunocorrective therapy. Conducting accompanying immunotherapy in combined and complex treatment allowed to increase the 5-year survival of patients with CC by 10.3% with the use of EIFT and 15,6% with EIFT + PF. The obtained results testify the ability of accompanying EIFT methods to enhance the antitumor effect of traditional treatment methods. The accompanying immunotherapy scheme, including low-volume plasmapheresis followed by EIFT, has the highest efficacy in complex treatment of patients with CC of the II–III stages, which improves the five-year survival rate of patients, increases the median progression-free survival and median overall survival, and also reduces the observed ratio of progression and death.
Keywords: cervical cancer, extracorporeal immunopharmacotherapy, immunomodulators, plasmapheresis.
References
1. ZHarinov GM, Molchanov OE, Agafonova MV, Rumyanceva SYU. Pervyj opyt lokal’noj immunoterapii onkoginekologicheskih bol’nyh // Citokiny i vospalenie. – 2002. – T. 1. – № 2. – S. 75. (In Russ).
2. Kenbaeva DK, Manambaeva ZA, Makishev AK, Kabylova SA. Immunoterapiya i vyzhivaemost’ bol’nyh rakom shejki matki i yaichnikov // Vestnik novyh medicinskih tekhnologij. – 2012. – № 1. – S. 143–145. (In Russ).
3. Kostyuchenko, A.L. EHfferentnaya terapiya // SPb.: Foliant, 2000. – 432 s. (In Russ).
4. Lazarev AF, Kenbaeva DK, Medeubaev RK, Gorbatenko AE, Tanatarov SZ. Vliyanie immunoterapii na kletochnoe zveno immuniteta pri rake shejki matki // Vestnik Ross. Akad. med. nauk. – 2014. – T. 69. – № 3–4. – S. 5–8. (In Russ).
5. Popovich AM. Immunoterapiya v onkologii. Spravochnik po immunoterapii dlya prakticheskogo vracha // SPb: Dialog, 2002. – S. 335–352. (In Russ).
6. Bambauer R, Latzo R, Schiel R. Therapeutic plasma exchange and selective plasma separation methods. Fundamental technologies, pathology and clinical results. Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich/Berlin, 2013. – P. 395–402.
7. Bhardwaj N. Harnessing the immune system to treat cancer // J. Clin. Invest. – 2007. – Vol. 117. – P. 1130–1136.
8. DiSaia PJ. Clinical gynaecologic oncology // P.J. DiSaia, W.T. Creasman (eds.). – 7th ed. – Mosby Elsevier, 2007. – 812 p.
9. Gattinoni L, Powell DJ, Rosenberg SA, Restifo NP. Adoptive immunotherapy for cancer: building on success // Nat. Rev. Immunol. – 2006. – N 6. – P. 383–393.
10. Rosenberg S, Restifo N, Yang J, Morgan R, Dudley M. Adoptive cell transfer a clinical path to effective cancer immunotherapy // Nature Reviews Cancer. – 2008. – N 8. – P. 299–308.
