• Title/Summary/Keyword: combined Korean medicine treatment

Search Result 1,602, Processing Time 0.026 seconds

Review of the developmental trend of implant surface modification using organic biomaterials (생체활성 유기물로 표면이 개질된 임플란트 개발 추이 분석 연구)

  • Hwang, Sung-Taek;Han, In-Ho;Huh, Jung-Bo;Kang, Jeong-Kyung;Ryu, Jae-Jun
    • The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
    • /
    • v.49 no.3
    • /
    • pp.254-262
    • /
    • 2011
  • Purpose: This study aims to evaluate and prospect for current research trend and developmental perspectives via analyzing recent biomaterial coated-implants study. Materials and methods: To investigate each subject respectively, several biomaterials that are using for implant surface coating were set as 'keywords'. By these keywords, major research groups in each subject were chosen, and research trend of them was analyzed. Trend of In vivo studies that examined selected biomaterials were analyzed to evaluate commercial potential. Results: The collagen research accounted for 40% of total implant study, which was the highest, and fibronectin, BMPs (bone morphogenetic proteins) and RGD (Arg-Gly-Asp) peptides followed, which were ranked in descending order. Furthermore, figures of all four research subjects were also increased with time, especially a sharp increase in RGD research. According to the results of major research group, collagen that was combined with other organic and inorganic biomaterials was mostly examined, rather than using collagen only. Major research groups investigating BMPs mostly focused on rhBMP-2. In animal studies, collagen was used as resorbable membrane in guided bone regeneration (GBR) or drug carrier, while BMPs were used with bone graft materials or coating material for titanium implant surface. Conclusion: There is not consistency of results even in identical subjects research field. Many studies are ongoing to optimize combination between mechanical surface treatment and biomaterials such as extracellular matrix component and growth factors.

Concurrent Chemoradiation Therapy in Stage III Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (III 기 비소세포성 폐암에서 Cisplatin-방사선동시병합요법의 효과)

  • Kim In Ah;Choi Ihl Bhong;Kang Ki Mun;Jang Jie Young;Song Jung Sub;Lee Sun Hee;Kuak Mun Sub;Shinn Kyung Sub
    • Radiation Oncology Journal
    • /
    • v.15 no.1
    • /
    • pp.27-36
    • /
    • 1997
  • Purpose : This study was tried to evaluate the Potential benefits of concurrent chemoradiation therapy (low dose daily cisplatin combined with split course radiation therapy) compared with conventional radiation therapy alone in stage III non-small cell lung cancer. The end points of analyses were response rate. overall survival, survival without locoregional failure, survival without distant metastasis, prognostic factors affecting survival and treatment related toxicities. Materials and Methods : Between April 1992 and March 1994, 32 patients who had stage III non-small cell lung cancer were treated with concurrent chemoradiation therapy. Radiation therapy for 2 weeks (300 cGy given 10 times up to 3000 cGy) followed by a 3 weeks rest period and then radiation therapy for 2 more weeks (250 cGy given 10 times up to 2500 cGy) was combined with $6mg/m^2$ of cisplatin. Follow-up period ranged from 13 months to 48 months with median of 24 months. Historical control group consisted of 32 patients who had stage III non-small cell lung cancer were received conventionally fractionated (daily 170-200 cGy) radiation therapy alone. Total radiation dose ranged from 5580 cGy to 7000 cGy with median of 5940 cGy. Follow-up Period ranged from 36 months to 105 months with median of 62 months. Result : Complete reponse rate was higher in chemoradiation therapy (CRT) group than radiation therapy (RT) group (18.8% vs. 6.3%, CRT group showed lower in-field failure rate compared with RT group(25% vs. 47%. The overall survival rate had no significant differences in between CRT group and RT group (17.5% vs. 9.4% at 2 years). The survival without locoregional failure (16.5% vs. 5.3% at 2 years) and survival without distant metastasis (17% vs. 4.6% at 2 years) also had no significant differences. In subgroup analyses for Patients with good performance status (Karnofsky performance scale 80), CRT group showed significantly higher overall survival rate compared with RT group (62.5% vs. 15.6% at 2 years). The prognostic factors affecting survival rate were performance status and pathologic subtype (squamous cell cancer vs. nonsquamous cell cancer) in CRT group. In RT alone group, performance status and stage (IIIa vs IIIb) were identified as a Prognostic factors. RTOG/EORTC grade 2-3 nausea and vomiting(22% vs 6% and bone marrow toxicities (25% vs. 15.6% were significantly higher in CRT group compared with RT alone group. The incidence of RTOG/EORTC grade 3-4 pulmonary toxicity had no significant differences in between CRT group and RT group (16% vs. 6%. The incidence of WHO grade 3-4 pulmonary fibrosis also had no significant differences in both group (38% vs. 25%. In analyses for relationship of field size and Pulmonary toxicity, the Patients who treated with field size beyond 200cm2 had significantly higher rates of pulmonary toxicities. Conclusion : The CRT group showed significantly higher local control rate than RT group. There were no significant differences of survival rate in between two groups. The subgroup of patients who had good performance status showed higher overall survival rate in CRT group than RT group. In spite of higher incidence of acute toxicities with concurrent chemoradiation therapy, the survival gain in subgroup of patients with good performance status were encouraging. CRT group showed higher rate of early death within 1 year, higher 2 year survival rate compared with RT group Therefore, to evaluate the accurate effect on survival of concurrent chemoradiation therapy, systematic follow-up for long term survivors are needed.

  • PDF