Current status and progress of immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer
-
摘要:
胰腺癌是一种常见的消化系统恶性肿瘤, 恶性程度高，预后极差。胰腺癌的治疗方式包括手术切除、化疗、放疗，其手术切除率低，对放化疗敏感性较差，导致5年生存率较低。免疫治疗是一种新型的治疗方式，部分恶性实体肿瘤实施免疫治疗联合其他治疗方式后获得了一定程度的缓解，降期后获得了手术机会，延长了患者总生存期，为胰腺癌的综合治疗带来了希望。本文对胰腺癌免疫治疗联合其他治疗方式的现状与进展进行综述，为胰腺癌的治疗提供参考。
Abstract:Pancreatic cancer is a common malignant tumor of the digestive system. It is discovered late, has a high degree of malignancy, and has an extremely poor prognosis. The treatment of pancreatic cancer includes surgical resection, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Due to its low surgical resection rate and poor sensitivity to chemical and radiotherapy, it leads to a low 5-year survival rate. As a new type of treatment, immunotherapy is used to treat some malignant solid tumors in combination with other treatments, and a certain degree of partial remission has been obtained. After the downgrading, the chance of surgery is obtained and the overall survival of the patient is prolonged, and it brings hope for the comprehensive treatment of pancreatic cancer. This article reviewed the research progress and current situation of pancreatic cancer immunotherapy and other treatment methods, and provided reference for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.
-
近年来，人工智能(AI)在疾病辅助诊疗、个人健康管理、医院智能管理等领域发挥了独特的作用，日益成为医护人员及患者的好帮手[1-2]。本研究对老年患者THR术后开展了思维导图联合AI音箱的延续性护理, 效果评价较好，现报告如下。
1. 资料与方法
1.1 一般资料
本研究经本院医学伦理委员会审核并批准。选择2018年5月—2019年5月在本院接受THR术并出院的102例患者作为研究对象，随机分为对照组(52例)和研究组(50例)。纳入标准: ①对本研究知情且自愿配合者; ②年龄≥60岁者; ③首次接受THR术治疗者; ④ THR术后2周内，且符合出院标准者。排除标准: ①有自身免疫系统疾病、恶性肿瘤等患者; ②有精神病、昏迷、意识障碍等患者; ③有听力、语言障碍者; ④资料不全，中途退出者。2组在年龄、性别等一般资料比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见表 1。
表 1 2组患者一般资料比较(x±s)组别 n 年龄/岁 性别 文化程度 致病类型 男 女 小学及以下 初中至高中 大专及以上 先天性髋关节发育不良 股骨头坏死 股骨颈骨折 研究组 50 67.3±5.2 19 31 19 15 16 14 21 15 对照组 52 66.4±4.6 23 29 23 16 13 12 24 16 1.2 方法
所有患者THR术后住院期间均由责任护士进行常规护理，待责任医生确认符合出院标准后方可办理出院。对照组患者出院前1 d, 由责任护士发放康复护理指导手册和健康宣教，患者出院后采用常规电话随访延续护理指导，并在其出院后1、3个月后告知复查。
研究组在对照组基础上接受思维导图联合AI音箱模式的延续性护理，主要流程如下(见图 1): ①组建联合式延续性护理团队。团队由骨科医生、护士长、责任护士、康复师、心理咨询师、IT技术工程师等人组成，所有成员均经过专业培训且考核合格。②制作思维导图。结合THR术后并发症预防及国内外最新临床报道，全体成员制作了THR出院后对应时间轴所需的康复护理及功能训练的思维导图。导图包含了患者出院后1~2周、3~4周、5~8周、3个月等各个阶段的康复训练内容。所有内容均遵循“安全合理、循序渐进”的基本原则。此外，思维导图还包含了伤口护理、饮食营养方案、用药管理、家庭环境支持等，并在各环节添加了示意图、文字说明及普通话或方言等方式说明。③宣教及使用。将思维导图及相关资料上传至患者或家属的微信、QQ、AI音箱APP端及病友微信群等通讯工具。出院前协助患者或家属下载手机AI音箱APP, 讲解思维导图联合AI音箱延续性护理的使用方法与问题处理。教授无法使用手机的患者或家属如何利用语音控制AI音箱。④质量控制。医护人员根据思维导图进行阶段性的提醒及相关资料的推送，并在每天8: 00—17: 00在线对患者延续性护理康复过程主诉的问题进行答疑、反馈，必要时进行家访或专家在线会诊，并及时告知患者出院后1、3个月复查。
1.3 观察指标
① 以Harris功能评分评价髋关节功能恢复情况[3], Harris评分包括疼痛、功能(步态、功能活动)、关节活动度和畸形4部分，总分100分，分值越高表示髋关节功能恢复越好。②以疼痛视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分评估疼痛程度[4], VAS评分总分为10分, 其中0分为无痛, 1~3分为轻度, 4~6分为中度, 7~10分为重度，分值越大表示疼痛越重。③利用焦虑自评量表(SAS)、抑郁自评量表(SDS)[5]分别对2组患者入院时及出院后3个月的负面心理进行评价。量表累积各条目得分计为SAS/SDS总分并折算为标准分，其中SAS评分, 50分则有焦虑倾向, SDS评分, 53分则有抑郁倾向。④对出院后3个月内发生感染、压疮、假体松动或脱位、深静脉血栓、髋臼增生等并发症发生率进行随访统计。⑤出院3个月后就延续性护理服务满意率进行非常满意、基本满意、不满意3个等级评价。满意率(%)=(基本满意+非常满意)人数/被调查人数×100%。
1.4 统计学分析
采用SPSS 20.0统计学软件进行数据分析，计量资料采用(x±s)表示，行t检验; 计数资料采用%表示，行χ2检验; P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。
2. 结果
2.1 2组出院时、出院后1、3个月Harris评分比较
出院时, 2组Harris评分比较, 差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。出院后1、3个月, 2组Harris评分均高于出院时，且研究组Harris评分高于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表 2。
表 2 2组出院时、出院后1、3个月Harris评分比较(x±s)分 组别 n 出院时 出院后1个月 出院后3个月 研究组 50 56.15±17.36 78.23±10.25*# 87.62±4.93*# 对照组 52 55.39±13.29 73.48±9.57* 81.52±5.21* 与出院时比较, * P < 0.05; 与对照组比较, #P < 0.05。 2.2 2组出院时、出院后1、3个月VAS评分比较
出院时, 2组VAS评分比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05); 出院后1、3个月, 2组VAS评分均低于出院时，且研究组VAS评分低于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表 3。
表 3 2组出院时、出院后1、3个月VAS评分比较(x±s)分 组别 n 出院时 出院后1个月 出院后3个月 研究组 50 6.63±1.21 4.67±0.69*# 3.41±0.22*# 对照组 52 6.54±1.37 5.06±0.75* 3.68±0.35* VAS: 视觉模拟评分。与出院时比较, * P < 0.05; 与对照组比较, #P < 0.05。 2.3 2组并发症发生率比较
随访结果显示，出院后3个月内，研究组并发症总发生率低于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表 4。
表 4 2组并发症发生率比较[n(%)]组别 n 感染 压疮 假体松动或脱位 髋臼增生 合计 研究组 50 1(2.0) 0 1(2.0) 0 2(4.0)* 对照组 52 2(3.8) 2(3.8) 2(3.8) 3(5.8) 9(17.3) 与对照组比较, * P < 0.05。 2.4 2组入院时、出院后3个月SAS评分、SDS评分比较
入院时, 2组SAS评分、SDS评分比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05); 出院后3个月, 2组SAS评分、SDS评分低于入院时，且研究组SAS评分、SDS评分低于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表 5。
表 5 2组入院时、出院后3个月SAS评分、SDS评分比较(x±s)分 组别 n SAS评分 SDS评分 入院时 出院后3个月 入院时 出院后3个月 研究组 50 52.27±4.67 42.42±3.51*# 57.47±5.74 43.38±4.27*# 对照组 52 53.01±4.85 46.74±4.28* 56.37±6.23 46.45±5.74* SAS: 焦虑自评量表; SDS: 抑郁自评量表。与入院时比较, * P < 0.05; 与对照组比较, #P < 0.05。 2.5 2组延续性护理满意率比较
随访结果表明，研究组延续性护理满意率高于对照组，差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。见表 6。
表 6 2组延续性护理满意率比较[n(%)]组别 n 基本满意 非常满意 不满意 总满意 研究组 50 21(42.0) 29(58.0) 0 50(100.0)* 对照组 52 27(51.9) 19(36.5) 6(11.5) 46(88.5) 与对照组比较, * P < 0.05。 3. 讨论
延续性护理作为医院护理的延续部分，是患者回归家庭或社区后促进康复的重要部分[6], 被广泛用于骨科[7]、脑部疾病[8]等术后患者的康复管理中。THR作为一种损伤性较大的假体置换术, 患者多为老年人，术后并发症较多，通常患者在术后1~2周即可出院，但THR患者的术后康复护理却不应少于半年。因此，对于THR患者实施延续性护理有重要意义。思维导图又称“心智图”，是利用图文形式将琐碎繁杂的信息归纳为直观的图形，以帮助学习者记忆、理解与解决实际问题[9]。近年来，思维导图在临床护理教学、腰椎间盘突出术后康复等应用中均有研究[10-11]报道。然而, 单一的思维导图只能将康复指导的内容条理化、归纳化，很大程度上限制了文化水平不高的患者或家属。因此，思维导图联合其他现代技术进行术后的康复护理十分必要。AI音箱具有强大的人机对话功能，可根据语音指令实现智能家居控制、语音购物、手机充值、叫外卖、音频点播等功能[12], 给老年人尤其是给行动不便者的生活带来了极大便利。因此，思维导图联合AI音箱模式应用于老年THR患者的延续性护理有着极强的实用性、可行性。
本院率先开展了思维导图联合AI音箱的延续性护理，并将该模式应用于老年THR患者的康复管理中。本研究结果表明，出院后3个月内，采用电话随访和思维导图联合AI音箱的延续性护理对于提高THR患者Harris评分，降低VAS评分、SAS评分及SDS评分均有较好效果。此外，采用思维导图联合AI音箱式的延续性护理也有助于降低患者3个月内的并发症发生率，提高护理满意率。这可能是因为相对于常规的电话随访，思维导图联合AI音箱模式更生动、高效，该模式充分综合THR患者术后延续护理的各个因素[13], 将其制成了延续性护理思维导图，并利用AI音箱对延续性护理的各环节进行强化。患者一方面可根据思维导图的音频、视频等进行康复训练，另一方面可通过AI音箱获取最新康复训练计划。此外，患者在无人陪护时还可以通过AI音箱进行人机对话、听音乐、听书等方式舒缓负面情绪，从而改善患者的负面心理和提高康复效果。
综上所述，思维导图联合人工智能AI音箱可有助于提高老年THR术后患者的延续性护理康复效果和护理满意率，也有助于降低患者的负面心理。
-
[1] DUCREUX M, CUHNA A S, CARAMELLA C, et al. Cancer of the pancreas: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up[J]. Ann Oncol, 2015, 26(Suppl 5): v56-v68.
[2] CONROY T, HAMMEL P, HEBBAR M, et al. FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 379(25): 2395-2406. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1809775
[3] LAMBERT A, SCHWARZ L, BORBATH I, et al. An update on treatment options for pancreatic adenocarcinoma[J]. Ther Adv Med Oncol, 2019, 11: 1758835919875568.
[4] DISIS M L. Mechanism of action of immunotherapy[J]. Semin Oncol, 2014, 41(Suppl 5): S3-S13.
[5] WEI S C, DUFFY C R, ALLISON J P. Fundamental mechanisms of immune checkpoint blockade therapy[J]. Cancer Discov, 2018, 8(9): 1069-1086. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-0367
[6] TANG J, YU J X, HUBBARD-LUCEY V M, et al. Trial watch: the clinical trial landscape for PD1/PDL1 immune checkpoint inhibitors[J]. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2018, 17(12): 854-855. doi: 10.1038/nrd.2018.210
[7] KASAKOVSKI D, SKRYGAN M, GAMBICHLER T, et al. Advances in targeting cutaneous melanoma[J]. Cancers, 2021, 13(9): 2090. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092090
[8] RUIZ-CORDERO R, DEVINE W P. Targeted therapy and checkpoint immunotherapy in lung cancer[J]. Surg Pathol Clin, 2020, 13(1): 17-33. doi: 10.1016/j.path.2019.11.002
[9] MAJIDPOOR J, MORTEZAEE K. The efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in cold cancers and future perspectives[J]. Clin Immunol Orlando Fla, 2021, 226: 108707. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2021.108707
[10] SIDERAS K, BRAAT H, KWEKKEBOOM J, et al. Role of the immune system in pancreatic cancer progression and immune modulating treatment strategies[J]. Cancer Treat Rev, 2014, 40(4): 513-522. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2013.11.005
[11] ROYAL R E, LEVY C, TURNER K, et al. Phase 2 trial of single agent Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma[J]. J Immunother, 2010, 33(8): 828-833. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e3181eec14c
[12] PATNAIK A, KANG S P, RASCO D, et al. Phase Ι study of pembrolizumab (MK-3475; anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody) in patients with advanced solid tumors[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2015, 21(19): 4286-4293. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2607
[13] BRAHMER J R, TYKODI S S, CHOW L Q M, et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2012, 366(26): 2455-2465. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200694
[14] KAMATH S D, KALYAN A, KIRCHER S, et al. Ipilimumab and gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase ib study[J]. Oncologist, 2019, 25(5): e808-e815.
[15] AGLIETTA M, BARONE C, SAWYER M B, et al. A phase I dose escalation trial of tremelimumab (CP-675, 206) in combination with gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer[J]. Ann Oncol, 2014, 25(9): 1750-1755. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu205
[16] WEISS G J, BLAYDORN L, BECK J, et al. Phase ib/II study of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and pembrolizumab in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma[J]. Investig New Drugs, 2018, 36(1): 96-102. doi: 10.1007/s10637-017-0525-1
[17] NETWORK C G A. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer[J]. Nature, 2012, 487(7407): 330-337. doi: 10.1038/nature11252
[18] LE D T, DURHAM J N, SMITH K N, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade[J]. Science, 2017, 357(6349): 409-413. doi: 10.1126/science.aan6733
[19] HU Z I, SHIA J R, STADLER Z K, et al. Evaluating mismatch repair deficiency in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: challenges and recommendations[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2018, 24(6): 1326-1336. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-3099
[20] LUCHINI C, BROSENS L A A, WOOD L D, et al. Comprehensive characterisation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with microsatellite instability: histology, molecular pathology and clinical implications[J]. Gut, 2021, 70(1): 148-156. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-320726
[21] MARABELLE A, LE D T, ASCIERTO P A, et al. Efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with noncolorectal high microsatellite instability/mismatch repair-deficient cancer: results from the phase ⅡKEYNOTE-158 study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(1): 1-10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02105
[22] LOLLINI P L, CAVALLO F, NANNI P, et al. Vaccines for tumour prevention[J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2006, 6(3): 204-216. doi: 10.1038/nrc1815
[23] KARTIKASARI A E R, PRAKASH M D, COX M, et al. Therapeutic cancer vaccines-T cell responses and epigenetic modulation[J]. Front Immunol, 2018, 9: 3109.
[24] LUTZ E, YEO C J, LILLEMOE K D, et al. A lethally irradiated allogeneic granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor-secreting tumor vaccine for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A Phase Ⅱtrial of safety, efficacy, and immune activation[J]. Ann Surg, 2011, 253(2): 328-335. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181fd271c
[25] LE D T, PICOZZI V J, KO A H, et al. Results from a phase IIb, randomized, multicenter study of GVAX pancreas and CRS-207 compared with chemotherapy in adults with previously treated metastatic pancreaticadenocarcinoma (ECLIPSE study)[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2019, 25(18): 5493-5502. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-2992
[26] LUTZ E R, WU A A, BIGELOW E, et al. Immunotherapy converts nonimmunogenic pancreatic tumors into immunogenic foci of immune regulation[J]. Cancer Immunol Res, 2014, 2(7): 616-631. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-14-0027
[27] SOARES K C, RUCKI A A, WU A A, et al. PD-1/PD-L1 blockade together with vaccine therapy facilitates effector T-cell infiltration into pancreatic tumors[J]. J Immunother, 2015, 38(1): 1-11. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0000000000000062
[28] LE D T, LUTZ E, URAM J N, et al. Evaluation of ipilimumab in combination with allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells transfected with a GM-CSF gene in previously treated pancreatic cancer[J]. Journal of immunotherapy, 2013, 36(7): 382-389. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e31829fb7a2
[29] NATH S, MUKHERJEE P. MUC1: a multifaceted oncoprotein with a key role in cancer progression[J]. Trends Mol Med, 2014, 20(6): 332-342. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2014.02.007
[30] PILLAI K, AKHTER J, CHUA T C, et al. Anticancer property of bromelain with therapeutic potential in malignant peritoneal mesothelioma[J]. Cancer Investig, 2013, 31(4): 241-250. doi: 10.3109/07357907.2013.784777
[31] RAMANATHAN R K, LEE K M, MCKOLANIS J, et al. Phase I study of a MUC1 vaccine composed of different doses of MUC1 peptide with SB-AS2 adjuvant in resected and locally advanced pancreatic cancer[J]. Cancer Immunol Immunother, 2005, 54(3): 254-264. doi: 10.1007/s00262-004-0581-1
[32] KAUFMAN H L, KIM-SCHULZE S, MANSON K, et al. Poxvirus-based vaccine therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer[J]. J Transl Med, 2007, 5: 60. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-5-60
[33] HARRINGTON K, FREEMAN D J, KELLY B, et al. Optimizing oncolytic virotherapy in cancer treatment[J]. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2019, 18(9): 689-706. doi: 10.1038/s41573-019-0029-0
[34] BIERMAN H R, CRILE D M, DOD K S, et al. Remissions in leukemia of childhood following acute infectious disease: Staphylococcus and Streptococcus, varicella, and feline panleukopenia[J]. Cancer, 1953, 6(3): 591-605. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(195305)6:3<591::AID-CNCR2820060317>3.0.CO;2-M
[35] MASOUD S J, HU J B, BEASLEY G M, et al. Efficacy of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) therapy in patients with in-transit melanoma metastasis decreases with increasing lesion size[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2019, 26(13): 4633-4641. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07691-3
[36] KAUFMAN H L, KOHLHAPP F J, ZLOZA A. Oncolytic viruses: a new class of immunotherapy drugs[J]. Nature reviews Drug discovery, 2015, 14(9): 642-662. doi: 10.1038/nrd4663
[37] HIROOKA Y, KASUYA H, ISHIKAWA T, et al. A Phase I clinical trial of EUS-guided intratumoral injection of the oncolytic virus, HF10 for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer[J]. BMC cancer, 2018, 18(1): 596. doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4453-z
[38] NAKAO A, KASUYA H, SAHIN T T, et al. A phase Ⅰ dose-escalation clinical trial of intraoperative direct intratumoral injection of HF10 oncolytic virus in non-resectable patients with advanced pancreatic cancer[J]. Cancer Gene Ther, 2011, 18(3): 167-175. doi: 10.1038/cgt.2010.65
[39] SAMSON A, SCOTT K J, TAGGART D, et al. Intravenous delivery of oncolytic reovirus to brain tumor patients immunologically primes for subsequent checkpoint blockade[J]. Sci Transl Med, 2018, 10(422): eaam7577. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aam7577
[40] GUJAR S, POL J G, KROEMER G. Heating it up: Oncolytic viruses make tumors ""hot"" and suitable for checkpoint blockade immunotherapies[J]. OncoImmunology, 2018, 7(8): e1442169.
[41] GUJAR S, POL J G, KIM Y, et al. Antitumor benefits of antiviral immunity: an underappreciated aspect of oncolytic virotherapies[J]. Trends Immunol, 2018, 39(3): 209-221. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2017.11.006
[42] RIBAS A, DUMMER R, PUZANOV I, et al. Oncolytic virotherapy promotes intratumoral T cell infiltration and improves anti-PD-1 immunotherapy[J]. Cell, 2017, 170(6): 1109-1119. e10. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.027
[43] HE J C, ZHANG Z W, LV S Q, et al. Engineered CAR T cells targeting mesothelin by piggyBac transposon system for the treatment of pancreatic cancer[J]. Cell Immunol, 2018, 329: 31-40. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2018.04.007
[44] BEATTY G L, O'HARA M H, LACEY S F, et al. Activity of mesothelin-specific chimeric antigen receptor T cells against pancreatic carcinoma metastases in a phase 1 trial[J]. Gastroenterology, 2018, 155(1): 29-32. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.03.029
[45] IMAOKA H, MIZUNO N, HARA K, et al. Prognostic impact of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) on patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Pancreatology, 2016, 16(5): 859-864. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.05.007
[46] CHMIELEWSKI M, HAHN O, RAPPL G, et al. T cells that target carcinoembryonic antigen eradicate orthotopic pancreatic carcinomas without inducing autoimmune colitis in mice[J]. Gastroenterology, 2012, 143(4): 1095-1107. e2. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.06.037
[47] FENG K C, LIU Y, GUO Y L, et al. Phase I study of chimeric antigen receptor modified T cells in treating HER2-positive advanced biliary tract cancers and pancreatic cancers[J]. Protein Cell, 2018, 9(10): 838-847. doi: 10.1007/s13238-017-0440-4
[48] RAJ D, YANG M H, RODGERS D, et al. Switchable CAR-T cells mediate remission in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma[J]. Gut, 2019, 68(6): 1052-1064. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316595
[49] WATANABE K, LUO Y, DA T, et al. Pancreatic cancer therapy with combined mesothelin-redirected chimeric antigen receptor T cells and cytokine-armed oncolytic adenoviruses[J]. JCI Insight, 2018, 3(7): e99573. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.99573
[50] ZHANG E, YANG P, GU J, et al. Recombination of a dual-CAR-modified T lymphocyte to accurately eliminate pancreatic malignancy[J]. J Hematol Oncol, 2018, 11(1): 102. doi: 10.1186/s13045-018-0646-9
[51] LOCKE F L, GHOBADI A, JACOBSON C A, et al. Long-term safety and activity of axicabtagene ciloleucel in refractory large B-cell lymphoma (ZUMA-1): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1–2 trial[J]. The Lancet Oncology, 2019, 20(1): 31-42. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30864-7
-
期刊类型引用(11)
1. 刘阳子，李莉. 以思维导图为基础的康复训练在膝关节置换术患者中的应用. 国际护理学杂志. 2024(08): 1409-1413 . 
百度学术
2. 黄改丽，丁晓芳. 渐进性抗阻运动对股骨粗隆间骨折术后患者骨愈合及关节功能恢复的影响. 婚育与健康. 2024(18): 49-51 . 百度学术
3. 牛文杰，田思男，张艳涛，梅延辉，苏庆国，张莉莉. 思维导图在泌尿外科实习中的应用探索. 中国继续医学教育. 2024(19): 118-121 . 百度学术
4. 李康，熊国辉，陈增庆. SuperPATH入路结合ERAS用于全髋关节置换术的疗效观察. 中国医学创新. 2024(29): 105-110 . 百度学术
5. 尹馨，焦娟，常志红，夏迎龙，刘杰，关坤萍. 外周血白细胞分类模型的建立与应用. 实用临床医药杂志. 2023(03): 86-90 . 本站查看
6. 熊小芳. 延续性护理对人工全髋关节置换术患者康复效果的影响. 透析与人工器官. 2023(01): 88-90 . 百度学术
7. 任苗苗，姚芳，王欢. 基于思维导图的聚焦解决模式在距腓前韧带损伤关节镜治疗患者中的应用. 海南医学. 2023(09): 1335-1339 . 百度学术
8. 路惠，丁荧，石隆燕，刘卫琳，徐志鹏. 目标为导向的渐进性训练对髋关节置换术后患者康复疗效观察. 赣南医学院学报. 2023(04): 371-375 . 百度学术
9. 唐丽华，程军艳. 思维导图引导双元护理干预策略对烟雾病术后患者的影响. 临床研究. 2022(05): 171-174 . 百度学术
10. 苏群益，王雨佳，宋晓霞. 院外延续性护理对老年髋关节置换患者的影响. 心理月刊. 2022(11): 171-173+194 . 百度学术
11. 殷娟，李树强. PBL、思维导图与空间课堂联合教学法在普外科护理教学中的应用效果. 卫生职业教育. 2022(24): 82-84 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(0)
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数:
- HTML全文浏览量:
- PDF下载量:
- 被引次数: 11
苏公网安备 32100302010246号