Tom 2, Nr 3 (2010)
Artykuły
Opublikowany online: 2010-11-03

dostęp otwarty

Wyświetlenia strony 1200
Wyświetlenia/pobrania artykułu 29708
Pobierz cytowanie

Eksport do Mediów Społecznościowych

Eksport do Mediów Społecznościowych

Istotne problemy w rozpoznawaniu i leczeniu choroby refluksowej przełyku

Tomasz Wocial
Gastroenterologia Kliniczna 2010;2(3):71-80.

Streszczenie

Istotnym problemem w leczeniu choroby refluksowej przełyku jest nieskuteczność standardowej dawki inhibitorów pompy protonowej (IPP), która dotyczy 10–40% chorych. Częstą przyczyną braku efektu leczenia jest słaba współpraca chorych i nieprzestrzeganie zasad stosowania leków. Zamiana jednego IPP na inny lub podwojenie jego dawki dobowej mogą być skuteczne u części chorych. W pozostałych przypadkach można wykorzystać nowe IPP o dłuższym czasie działania. U osób ze zgagą oporną na IPP należy rozważyć leczenie inhibitorami receptora H2, baklofenem, akupunkturą lub toksyną botulinową wstrzykiwaną endoskopowo w okolicę odźwiernika, jednak każda z tych metod ma poważne ograniczenia. Mimo niewystarczającej skuteczności leczenia, choroba refluksowa rzadko ulega progresji od postaci objawowych do zapalenia i zwężenia przełyku oraz metaplazji Barretta, nawet w trakcie 20-letniej obserwacji. Nadal trwają poszukiwania optymalnego sposobu potwierdzenia związku objawów z refluksem. Badanie mikroskopowe wycinków z przełyku wykazuje poszerzenie przestrzeni międzykomórkowych pod wpływem refluksu, rezonans czynnościowy mózgu może potwierdzić nadwrażliwość trzewną przełyku, a manometria przełyku o wysokiej rozdzielczości w połączeniu z rezonansem magnetycznym żołądka kompleksowo ocenia wydolność anatomicznej bariery antyrefluksowej. Metodą z wyboru jest jednak nadal całodobowe monitorowanie pH i impedancji w przełyku, które poza oceną związku objawów z refluksem umożliwia pośredni pomiar jego objętości poprzez ustalenie proksymalnego zasięgu w przełyku. Ostateczne określenie znaczenia objętości refluksu pozwoli w przyszłości na zrozumienie mechanizmów powstawania objawów, a jej bezpośredni pomiar będzie podstawą oceny skuteczności leczenia choroby refluksowej przełyku.
Gastroenterologia Kliniczna 2010, tom 2, nr 3, 71–80

Artykuł dostępny w formacie PDF

Pokaż PDF Pobierz plik PDF

Referencje

  1. Rutkowski P. (red.) Mięsaki tkanek miękkich. Via Medica, Gdańsk 2015.
  2. Wojciechowska U, Didkowska J. Nowotwory w Polsce w 2012 roku. Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology. 2013; 63(3): 197–216.
  3. ESMO/European Sarcoma Network Working Group. Soft tissue and visceral sarcomas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014; 25 Suppl 3: iii102–iii112.
  4. Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW, et al. WHO Classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone. Lyon: IARC. 2013.
  5. Lasota J. Molecular genetics in soft tissue tumors. In: Miettinen M. ed. Modern soft tissue pathology. Tumors and non-neoplastic conditions. University Press, Cambridge 2010: 127–180.
  6. Soft tissue sarcoma. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC. ed. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition. Springer, New York 2010: 291–296.
  7. Amin MB, Edge S, Greene F. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 8th edition. Springer International Publishing. Cham 2017.
  8. Bonvalot S, Miceli R, Berselli M, et al. Aggressive surgery in retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma carried out at high-volume centers is safe and is associated with improved local control. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 17(6): 1507–1514.
  9. Gronchi A, Miceli R, Colombo C, et al. Frontline extended surgery is associated with improved survival in retroperitoneal low- to intermediate-grade soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(4): 1067–1073.
  10. Soft tissue sarcoma. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. 2016; Version 2.
  11. Rossi CR, Vecchiato A, Mastrangelo G, et al. Adherence to treatment guidelines for primary sarcomas affects patient survival: a side study of the European CONnective TIssue CAncer NETwork (CONTICANET). Ann Oncol. 2013; 24(6): 1685–1691.
  12. Rosenberg SA, Tepper J, Glatstein E, et al. The treatment of soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities: prospective randomized evaluations of (1) limb-sparing surgery plus radiation therapy compared with amputation and (2) the role of adjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 1982; 196(3): 305–315.
  13. Yang JC, Chang AE, Baker AR, et al. Randomized prospective study of the benefit of adjuvant radiation therapy in the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas of the extremity. J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16(1): 197–203.
  14. Pisters PW, Harrison LB, Leung DH, et al. Long-term results of a prospective randomized trial of adjuvant brachytherapy in soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 1996; 14(3): 859–868.
  15. Davis AM, O'Sullivan B, Bell RS, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative radiotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma of the limbs: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2002; 359(9325): 2235–2241.
  16. Koseła-Paterczyk H, Szacht M, Morysiński T, et al. Preoperative hypofractionated radiotherapy in the treatment of localized soft tissue sarcomas. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014; 40(12): 1641–1647.
  17. Pervaiz N, Colterjohn N, Farrokhyar F, et al. A systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adjuvant chemotherapy for localized resectable soft-tissue sarcoma. Cancer. 2008; 113(3): 573–581.
  18. Gronchi A, Frustaci S, Mercuri M, et al. Short, full-dose adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk adult soft tissue sarcomas: a randomized clinical trial from the Italian Sarcoma Group and the Spanish Sarcoma Group. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30(8): 850–856.
  19. Gronchi A, Ferrari S, Quagliuolo V, et al. Histotype-tailored neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy in patients with high-risk soft-tissue sarcomas (ISG-STS 1001): an international, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, multicentre trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 18(6): 812–822.
  20. Issels RD, Lindner LH, Verweij J, et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC-STBSG), European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology (ESHO). Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy alone or with regional hyperthermia for localised high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised phase 3 multicentre study. Lancet Oncol. 2010; 11(6): 561–570.
  21. Trabulsi NH, Patakfalvi L, Nassif MO, et al. Hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion for extremity soft tissue sarcomas: systematic review of clinical efficacy and quality assessment of reported trials. J Surg Oncol. 2012; 106(8): 921–928.
  22. Antman K, Crowley J, Balcerzak SP, et al. An intergroup phase III randomized study of doxorubicin and dacarbazine with or without ifosfamide and mesna in advanced soft tissue and bone sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 1993; 11(7): 1276–1285.
  23. Judson I, Verweij J, Gelderblom H, et al. European Organisation and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014; 15(4): 415–423.
  24. Maki RG, Wathen JK, Patel SR, et al. Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas: results of sarcoma alliance for research through collaboration study 002 [corrected]. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(19): 2755–2763.
  25. Demetri GD, von Mehren M, Jones RL, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34(8): 786–793.
  26. van der Graaf WTA, Blay JY, Chawla SP, et al. EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group, PALETTE study group. Pazopanib for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (PALETTE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012; 379(9829): 1879–1886.
  27. Rutkowski P, Van Glabbeke M, Rankin CJ, et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue/Bone Sarcoma Group, Southwest Oncology Group. Imatinib mesylate in advanced dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans: pooled analysis of two phase II clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(10): 1772–1779.
  28. Blay JY, Leahy MG, Nguyen BB, et al. Randomised phase III trial of trabectedin versus doxorubicin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in translocation-related sarcomas. Eur J Cancer. 2014; 50(6): 1137–1147.
  29. Le Cesne A, Blay JY, Cupissol D. Results of a prospective randomized phase III T-SAR trial comparing trabectedin vs best supportive care (BSC) in patients with pretreated advanced soft tissue sarcoma. Encyclopedia of Cancer. 2017: 4280–4280.
  30. Le Cesne A, Blay JY, Domont J, et al. Interruption versus continuation of trabectedin in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma (T-DIS): a randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015; 16(3): 312–319.
  31. Schöffski P, Chawla S, Maki RG, et al. Eribulin versus dacarbazine in previously treated patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma: a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2016; 387(10028): 1629–1637.
  32. Tap WD, Jones RL, Van Tine BA, et al. Olaratumab and doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone for treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma: an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2016; 388(10043): 488–497.
  33. Gounder MM, Stacchiotti S, Schöffski P, et al. Phase 2 multicenter study of the EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat in adults with INI1 negative epithelioid sarcoma (NCT02601950). J Clin Oncol. 2017; (suppl; abstr 11058).
  34. Voutsadakis IA, Zaman K, Leyvraz S. Breast sarcomas: current and future perspectives. Breast. 2011; 20(3): 199–204.
  35. Bousquet G, Confavreux C, Magné N, et al. Outcome and prognostic factors in breast sarcoma: a multicenter study from the rare cancer network. Radiother Oncol. 2007; 85(3): 355–361.
  36. Rutkowski P, Śpiewankiewicz B, Koseła H, et al. Zalecenia postępowania diagnostyczno-terapeutycznego u chorych na mięsaki macicy. Current Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 11(1): 24–32.
  37. McMeekin DS. Sarcoma of the uterus. In: DiSaia P, Creasman W. ed. Clinical gynecologic oncology. Eight edition. Elsevier 2013: 175–188.
  38. Reed NS, Mangioni C, Malmström H, et al. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group. Phase III randomised study to evaluate the role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in the treatment of uterine sarcomas stages I and II: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study (protocol 55874). Eur J Cancer. 2008; 44(6): 808–818.
  39. Gronchi A, Colombo C, Le Péchoux C, et al. ISG and FSG. Sporadic desmoid-type fibromatosis: a stepwise approach to a non-metastasising neoplasm--a position paper from the Italian and the French Sarcoma Group. Ann Oncol. 2014; 25(3): 578–583.
  40. Kasper B, Baumgarten C, Bonvalot S, et al. Desmoid Working Group. Management of sporadic desmoid-type fibromatosis: a European consensus approach based on patients' and professionals' expertise - a sarcoma patients EuroNet and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group initiative. Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51(2): 127–136.
  41. Rutkowski P, Lugowska I. Follow-up in soft tissue sarcomas. Memo. 2014; 7(2): 92–96.
  42. Miettinen M, Lasota J. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors - definition, clinical, histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular genetic features and differential diagnosis. Virchows Archiv. 2001; 438(1): 1–12.
  43. ESMO/European Sarcoma Network Working Group, ESMO / European Sarcoma Network Working Group. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014; 25(supl. 7): iii21–iii26.
  44. Rutkowski P, Gronchi A, Hohenberger P, et al. Neoadjuvant imatinib in locally advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST): the EORTC STBSG experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013; 20(9): 2937–2943.
  45. Rutkowski P, Wozniak A, Dębiec-Rychter M, et al. Clinical utility of the new American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: current overall survival after primary tumor resection. Cancer. 2011; 117(21): 4916–4924.
  46. Rutkowski P, Nowecki ZI, Michej W, et al. Risk criteria and prognostic factors for predicting recurrences after resection of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007; 14(7): 2018–2027.
  47. Joensuu H, Eriksson M, Sundby Hall K, et al. Adjuvant Imatinib for High-Risk GI Stromal Tumor: Analysis of a Randomized Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34(3): 244–250.
  48. Blanke CD, Demetri GD, von Mehren M, et al. Long-term results from a randomized phase II trial of standard- versus higher-dose imatinib mesylate for patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors expressing KIT. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26(4): 620–625.
  49. Demetri GD, von Mehren M, Blanke CD, et al. Efficacy and safety of imatinib mesylate in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347(7): 472–480.
  50. Heinrich MC, Corless CL, Demetri GD, et al. Kinase mutations and imatinib response in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(23): 4342–4349.
  51. Demetri GD, van Oosterom AT, Garrett CR, et al. Efficacy and safety of sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour after failure of imatinib: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006; 368(9544): 1329–1338.
  52. Reichardt P, Kang YK, Rutkowski P, et al. Clinical outcomes of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors: safety and efficacy in a worldwide treatment-use trial of sunitinib. Cancer. 2015; 121(9): 1405–1413.
  53. Demetri G, Reichardt P, Kang YK, et al. Efficacy and safety of regorafenib for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours after failure of imatinib and sunitinib (GRID): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2013; 381(9863): 295–302.
  54. Montemurro M, Gelderblom H, Bitz U, et al. Sorafenib as third- or fourth-line treatment of advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour and pretreatment including both imatinib and sunitinib, and nilotinib: A retrospective analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2013; 49(5): 1027–1031.
  55. Bauer S, Rutkowski P, Hohenberger P, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients with GIST undergoing metastasectomy in the era of imatinib ― analysis of prognostic factors (EORTC-STBSG collaborative study). Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014; 40(4): 412–419.